Dr. Ben Powell talks with me about immigration. Dr. Powell unpacks the question of “what happens if immigrants move to America and then erode the institution?”. Dr. Powell argues that immigrants actually increase economic freedoms in their host country. We explore the idea that economics is downstream of culture. Dr. Powell argues that the immigrants that move to a nation do so because they appreciate and want the values of the nation they to which they move. Dr. Powell discusses the emergent nature of culture and argues that while immigrants will shape culture, they will not reduce economic freedoms. We discuss the people left behind by immigrants and issues like “Brain Drain”. I ask Dr. Powell about assimilation and then we debate the scale of the illegal immigration issue. Finally, I ask Dr. Powell if his views have changed in light of events since 2020 and any concerns he has about mass migration. SE5: E4 FOLLOW ME HERE: Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/econ-buff-podcast Amazon Music: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/0434c041-ec75-443e-8002-68cfcdd66db6/econ-buff-podcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/econ.buff.1 Substack: https://econbuffpodcast.substack.com/ My website: https://econbuffpodcast.wixsite.com/mysite Thumbnail photo credit: Bing AI Image Generation Benjamin Powell Profile: https://www.depts.ttu.edu/freemarketinstitute/people/powell.php Wretched Refuse? (Amazon link): https://www.amazon.com/Wretched-Refuse-Political-Immigration-Institutions/dp/1108702457 Alex Nowrasteh (Profile): https://www.cato.org/people/alex-nowrasteh

Dr. Rex Pjesky talks with me about Javier Milei’s speech to the World Economic Forum in January of 2024. Dr. Pjesky explains the importance of the World Economic Forum. Dr. Pjesky highlights how unusual it is to have a professor of economics in a political office. We explore Milei’s use of the arguments that echo great economists of the past such as Miltion Friedman and Israel Kirzner. Dr. Pjesky lays out how Milei argues for decentralized economies and why the field of economics believes collectivism is ineffective for economic policy. Dr. Pjesky discusses the “hockey stick” of economic growth and exponential growth is tied to the industrial revolution. Finally, we explore what economists call the discovery process in markets and the importance of economic freedom to a citizenship. SE5: E3 FOLLOW ME HERE: Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/econ-buff-podcast Amazon Music: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/0434c041-ec75-443e-8002-68cfcdd66db6/econ-buff-podcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/econ.buff.1 Substack: https://econbuffpodcast.substack.com/ My website: https://econbuffpodcast.wixsite.com/mysite Thumbnail photo credit: Bing AI Image Generation

Dr. Alex Salter talks with me about his book Money and the Rule of Law. Dr. Salter explains the major problems with current monetary policy execution. Dr. Salter argues that central banks struggle to implement monetary policy effectively because of discretion on the part of the central bank. We explore Salter’s main argument in the book, that the Federal Reserve should not make its own goals, but that the democratic process should more tightly define the Fed’s objectives. Dr. Salter lays the framework out for how the paradigm of monetary policy should be redefined, where the rule of law should provide the foundation for monetary policy, removing discretion over the goals of the Fed. Finally, we explore Dr. Salter’s recent opinion piece where he argues that the FED should stop lowering interest rates even though inflation was 3.7% at the time of his writing.

Dr. Fernando Colunga talks with me about using Divisia monetary aggregates to measure how much money is in the economy. Dr. Colunga explains the central problems with current money measurement. We discuss simple sum measures and Dr. Colunga argues that simple sums can be improved upon by weighting the different types of money. We explore liquidity, with Dr. Colunga explaining how Divisia monetary measures apply weights to various categories of money based on their liquidity. Dr. Colunga lays the framework out for how Divisia measures are constructed and describes when simple sum measurements will differ most from Divisia measurements. Finally, we explore how new money measures might impact monetary policy if employed, and how economists are constructing unique Divisia measures for each country.

Dr. Brent Evans and Dr. Chris Clark talk with me about marijuana and recruiting in college athletics. Dr. Evans and Dr. Clark explain why marijuana legalization might impact college basketball and college football recruiting. We discuss the timeline of legalization in different states and Dr. Evans and Dr. Clark highlight why recruiting is so important to universities, arguing that athletics programs are important to universities as a whole. We explore why college athletes might care about the legal status of marijuana with Dr. Evans and Dr. Clark explaining how athletes might be attracted or repelled by legalization. Dr. Evans and Dr. Clark explain what legalization does to football recruiting and what it does to college basketball recruiting. Finally, we explore why these two different sports experience different impacts from legalization of marijuana, and I question Dr. Evans and Dr. Clark if marijuana legalization is a proxy for political environment and if political environment might explain the differences in recruiting outcomes.

Dr. Kevin Grier talks with me about the long road to good governance. Dr. Grier explains why so many countries are so poor for so long despite the path out of poverty being known. We discuss what these economic components are and Dr. Grier argues that it is the origin and development of the state that has made and continues to make it so hard to get good governance and national wealth. We explore the origin of governance, with Dr. Grier explaining how states arose to solve the problem of violence. Dr. Grier says this became a balancing act between elites, who had the power to address the violence, and the rents paid to these elites. Dr. Grier lays the framework for understanding modern governance by defining the natural state, or limited access orders, and open access orders. Finally we explore isomorphic mimicry, good enough governance, and second best institutions, and their potential ability to help poor nations reach better governance.

Dr. Dan Klein talks with me about the Statement of Commitment to Academic Freedom and to Intellectual Merit he coauthored with colleagues in the economics department at George Mason University. Dr. Klein walks us through the development of the statement and why it is important to “correct up” as faculty at a university. We discuss intellectual merit and Dr. Klein argues that departments must have control over their hiring decisions and discusses subsidiarity as it relates to a university system. We explore academic freedom and it’s benefits, with Dr. Klein putting forth that science and scholarship have an ethical purpose and bearing. Dr. Klein says the beauty and genius of the traditional system is open discussion and debate, which Leftism threatens with the governmentalization of social affairs. Dr. Klein addresses the impacts on research and society’s ability to trust scholars and researchers from Leftism eroding academic freedom and intellectual merit. Finally we explore what other academics can do and what responsibility more senior and more secure academics have to their junior colleagues.

Dr. Eric McKee talks with me about the recent events at Silicon Valley Bank. Dr. McKee walks us through what happened and why it is important. We discuss why SVB failed and Dr. McKee argues that the banking system is top heavy, with a few major banks wielding disproportionate power. We explore how the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation took over and attempted to sell off SVB to prevent it’s collapse. Dr. McKee addresses the differences between default risk and interest rate risk. Finally we explore the potential for moral hazard if the FDIC raises the limit on deposit insurance.

Dr. Cristian Sepulveda talks with me about how sports teams impact their local economies. Dr. Sepulveda lays out why cities agree to fund stadiums to attract sports despite the consensus of the economic literature on the subject. .Dr. Sepulveda walks us through cost benefit analysis and how it applies to local development from sports teams and stadiums. Dr. Sepulveda introduces two key ideas in understanding “hidden costs” of sports teams to their local economies, leakages and substitution effects. Dr. Sepulveda addresses the role of player income and owner profits on their local economy, arguing that most of their income does not stay in the local economy. We discuss the multiplier effect, both how it effects the eventual impact of a team on its city, and what the empirical evidence suggests the multiplier effect is in practice. Dr. Sepulveda evaluates the impact of sports teams on job creation and destruction, as well as the type, and quality, of jobs in the local economy. Finally, Dr. Sepulveda discusses his estimates of the total effects of an “average” team on their local economy in each of the four major North American sport leagues.

Dr. Ryan Mattson talks with me about recent changes at the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. Dr. Mattson walks us through why he does not expect this to cause changes in the balance of power at the Board of Governors. We discuss the interaction between the FOMC and the Board of Governors. Dr. Mattson argues that the Federal Reserve System is top heavy, with the Chair of the Board of Governors and the Board itself wielding disproportionate power. We then explore the dynamics of the interactions between the regional districts of the FED and the top of the FED system (Board of Governors and FOMC). Dr. Mattson addresses the nature of representation at the FOMC, and we investigate whether the people atop each FED district represent the people of the regions they preside over. Finally we explore negative interest rates and whether this mechanism can force banks to put liquidity into the system when the banks might not otherwise want to do so.

Dr. Ryan Mattson and Dr. Rex Pjesky continue the discussion with me about inflation and potential policy responses to it. We respond to a Washington Post article proposing different things the White House can do to combat the current inflation episode. Dr. Pjesky reacts to the proposal suggesting taxing wealthy investors. He discusses how increasing taxes might actually be used to fight inflation. He says for any policy to fight inflation it has to shrink the money supply. Dr. Mattson discusses the suggestion to prepare for FED intervention and to de-escalate the trade war. He lays out the importance of forward guidance and argues the FED should target divisia aggregate measures of money and the asset balance sheet to fight inflation. Dr. Pjesky addresses Matt Darling’s proposal to improve America’s supply chains. He notes that the ideas laid in Darling’s proposal are good ideas but are not inflation-fighting ideas. In what is easily the most enlightening portion of the podcast, Dr. Mattson explains how supply shocks and other short-run issues are related to expectations, not aggregate supply. Dr. Mattson identifies all of the shocks as aggregate demand shocks citing that they are not institutional or technological changes. Dr. Mattson argues that supply chain improvements are aggregate demand increases. Dr. Pjesky summarizes Dr. Mattson’s approach as taking “inflation is everywhere and always a monetary phenomenon” seriously, and anything that increases income, has aggregate demand effects because every dollar of spending is a dollar of income. Dr. Mattson and Dr. Pjesky then both take on the suggestion that “inflation is a wildly overblown attempt to stop progressives”, which both reject as a reasonable assessment. Dr. Mattson argues we are not necessarily facing an inflation crisis. Dr. Pjesky discusses why curbing corporate profiteering is not an effective inflation-fighting technique. I then lay out the argument that corporations are always profit maximizing and hence cannot explain the change in inflation. Dr. Pjesky expresses frustration with the way the field of economics measures and then teaches inflation, such that it confuses the public into thinking inflation can be fought sector by sector. He then shows that lowering prices in any one area is not the same as lowering inflation. Dr. Mattson then explores inflation measures like CPI. Finally, Dr. Mattson has a one-word reaction to using price controls to fight inflation.

Dr. Ryan Mattson and Dr. Rex Pjesky talk with me about inflation and potential policies responses to it. We respond to a Washington Post article proposing different things the White House can do to combat the current inflation episode. Dr. Mattson reacts to the first proposal which suggests national reindustrialization. He describes the economic theory behind inflation and monetary policy, setting up the whole episode. Dr. Pjesky discusses the suggestion to stop federal spending, what it means, and how fiscal and monetary policy interact. He believes this is one of the few decent suggestions and enlightens us on the interaction between monetary policy and fiscal policy. Dr. Mattson addresses Claudia Sahm’s proposal control the Covid Pandemic to fight inflation. He praises Sahm’s work in general but criticizes this article as off base in terms of macro theory and practice. Dr. Pjesky explains how investing in child care will not be a solution to inflation. We spend the rest of the episode exploring this question. We field questions from the audience about various inflation and unemployment ideas. Dr. Mattson and Dr. Pjesky address what the labor force is and how it interacts with inflation. I lay out my view on how culture and economics interact. Dr. Pjesky discusses how economists identify whether a trend can be causing another trend. Dr. Mattson argues that family structure does not have macroeconomic consequences and I push back. Finally, we explore the nature of wages, government intervention, and inflation.

Dr. Rex Pjesky talks with me about student loan debt forgiveness. Dr. Pjesky walks us through the details of student loan debt forgiveness plan. We discuss the potential mechanisms by which the cancelation of debt could help the economy. Dr. Pjesky argues that there’s no mechanism through which the cancelation of debt would impact supply side concerns. Dr. Pjesky then goes into detail about how cancelling debt might impact demand. Dr. Pjesky addresses inflation and explains the implications for inflation depend on how the debt forgiveness plan is financed. Finally, Dr. Pjesky discusses the potential for this to become Free College for All, and we explore the question of if any of this even matters given that the government has not been requiring people to pay on their loans since 2020.

Dr. Bryan Caplan answers the question, “How Evil are Politicians?”. Dr. Caplan walks us through why he views politicians as evil. Dr. Caplan argues that politicians are negligent when evaluating the outcomes of their policies. Dr. Caplan addresses the role of incentives and how it differs between markets and politics, especially in a democracy. Dr. Caplan lays out how politicians are demagogues, desiring power and making decisions accordingly. We discuss whether democracy motivates power-hungry politicians to do a good job despite bad intentions. Dr. Caplan evaluates democracy as a solution to evil politicians. Finally, Dr. Caplan discusses the nature of truth and why he is pessimistic about the future of political decision-making.

Dr. Eric McKee talks with me about Elon Musk acquiring Twitter. Dr. McKee walks us through the differences between hostile and friendly takeovers. We discuss what steps are involved in a hostile take over. Dr. McKee explains the main three anti-takeover provisions corporations can take. Dr. McKee addresses so called “poison pills” and how a company can dilute their stock in order to prevent a hostile takeover. Dr. McKee lays out how a company can find another buyer to compete with acquiring agent, known as a white knight. We discuss staggered boards, where firms keep their board of directors from being up for election every year, thus making a hostile takeover harder by delaying when board members can be replaced. Dr. McKee evaluates the agreed upon purchase price and discusses why Twitter stock has not risen all the way to the agreed upon purchase price. Finally, Dr. McKee gives his thoughts on why Musk might be buying Twitter and relates it to firm life cycles, pointing out that Twitter is relatively young for a tech firm. We close by discussing activist investing.

Dr. Alexander Salter talks with me about distributism. Dr. Salter walks us through what distributism is and from where it comes. We discuss the history of distributism, and why distributists think it is a Third Way between capitalism and socialism. Dr. Salter explains which issues with capitalism distributists focus on and how distributists believe wide spread productive property can solve these issues. Dr. Salter lays out how disributists view the use of government intervention to achieve distributist ends. Dr. Salter addresses how distributism views markets and answers whether distributists are “anti-free market”. We discuss the distinction between capitalism and free enterprise. Dr. Salter evaluates the historical record of capitalism and the implications of the first and second industrial revolution on the prospects of distributist thought impacting public discourse over how the economy is ordered. Finally, Dr. Salter answers my question about the nature of ownership and whether people merely own things to access the “service” that particular piece of property grants the owner.

Dr. Trey Dronyk-Trosper talks with me about place based initiatives. Dr. Dronyk-Trosper walks us through what place based initiatives are and what levels of government use them. We discuss the history of the use of place based initiatives, and why governments employ them. Dr. Dronyk-Trosper explains that the performance of place based initiatives in creating positive economic outcomes has been poor and lays out the reasons why this is. Dr. Dronyk-Trosper addresses push-pull mechanisms, where place based initiatives move economic activity around within a geographic area, rather than create new economic activity. Dr. Dronyk-Trosper lays out how agglomeration effects impact industries and potentially give governments a reason to use place based initiatives at all. We discuss the impacts of agglomeration economies on industries. Dr. Dronyk-Trosper argues place based initiatives natural cause malinvestment, lays out why this is problematic for local economies, and discusses how this creates a “race to the bottom” where governments compete to attract businesses but damage their economies more in the process. Finally, Dr. Dronyk-Trosper discusses various versions of place based initiatives, such as Tax Increment Financing, Business Improvement Districts, and Opportunity Zones.

Dr. Rex Pjesky talks with me about price controls and answers whether or not they could reduce inflation. Dr. Pjesky walks us through the difference between inflation and measured inflation. We discuss the Chicago Booth Initiative on Global Markets survey, and why economists might actually agree that price controls could reduce measured inflation. Dr. Pjesky explains what the argument against price controls is from economic theory and evidence. Dr. Pjesky addresses a careful reading of survey question. Dr. Pjesky lays out how price controls can reduce measured inflation and the other types of damage it would do. We discuss the impacts of price controls on the ability to even measure inflation. Dr. Pjesky argues price controls would naturally causes changes in consumption patterns, and that these changes could actually impact measured inflation, but carefully noted this would not impact inflation itself. Finally, Dr. Pjesky explains that a careful reading of the survey results shows not a single surveyed economist thinks price controls are a good idea and echoes the sentiment of economists everywhere about price controls; “Just Stop, Seriously”.

Dr. Ryan Mattson and Dr. Rex Pjesky talk with me about economic growth and its causes. Dr. Pjesky walks us through what growth is and how it is related to the standard of living. We discuss the nature of the standard of living, what it means, and how coordination plays a role in economic history. Dr. Mattson argues growth in the standard of living matters more than the level of standard of living. Dr. Pjesky explains how growth translates into future wellbeing. Dr. Mattson and Dr. Pjesky address the inclusion of things other than material wellbeing our measures of economic growth. Dr. Pjesky lays out the history of economic growth throughout history and I push back on his description as partially a product of how we measure economic wellbeing. We discuss the potential for economic growth to permit people to more reliably provide for lower-order needs and thus have more resources available to focus on higher-order needs such as the intellectual and spiritual. Dr. Mattson explains his view on how stagnation in economic growth hampers how opportunities are available to individuals in that stagnant economy. Dr. Pjesky explains that technology changes cannot explain the major economic growth that occurred during the industrial revolution and following, arguing instead that coordination and access to the resources, knowledge, and skills of others are what makes us wealthy. Finally, we explore what makes some nations rich and others poor and discuss how some nations, during the most connected time in history can actually regress in terms of economic growth.

Dr. Rex Pjesky and Dr. Ryan Mattson talk with me about inflation and the current conditions of the economy. Dr. Pjesky walks us through what inflation is and why it matters. We discuss the nature of the current inflation of episode, what it means for inflation to be transitory or persistent, and which the current inflation seems most likely to be, and both Dr. Mattson and Dr. Pjesky explain what the implications are for wages, prices, and interest rates. Dr. Mattson addresses the idea that the Federal Reserve disagrees with economists and argues that there is disagreement amongst Federal Reserve officials as to the nature of inflation. Dr. Pjesky lays out ways we see inflation that do not seem to be price increases at first glance, such as changes in product packaging. We discuss the impacts of stimulus bills such as the CARES Act in terms of inflation. Dr. Mattson explains the FED is already addressing inflation in part by tapering, reducing the size of their balance sheet. Finally, Dr. Pjesky explains how inflation affects the economy, particularly that its effects are non-uniform across the economy, we explore the role of supply chain issues in causing inflation, and how real asset markets reflect inflation.