Platypus Economics with Justin Wolfers

On this Fed-heavy episode of Off the Clock, Justin Wolfers and Bloomberg's Stacey Vanek Smith dig into new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh's argument for a quieter, less transparent central bank — and why it doesn't hold up. Warsh defended saying less, insisting markets should take their cues from the economy instead of the Fed. Then his speech pushed expected interest rates sharply higher anyway.
Justin's point is simple: whether or not the Fed means to guide you, you're listening either way — so it's better to be clear. Stacey pushes back with the real case for silence, which is the tendency for forward guidance to create "glass handcuffs."
They also weigh the escalating-but-still-small Canada tariff fight (why $20 billion is tiny — until it isn't), the limits of "economic outcast" pressure on Iran, and a worrying dip in women's labor-force participation driven by rising child care costs and shrinking work-from-home flexibility.
Finally, in honor of the late, great Dolly Parton, Justin and Stacey discuss how she was somewhat of an economist herself – with economics permeating so much of her songbook and lasting legacy.
🔒 Get 20% off DeleteMe by going to https://joindeleteme.com/WOLFERS and use code WOLFERS to protect your privacy! 🙌
Subscribe — it's the one signal we promise to make loud and clear:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com
Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

In this episode of the Professor Is In, Justin answers your questions from his earlier episode debunking the Census Bureau’s claim that 24,000 noncitizens voted in the 2020 election.
He starts by addressing the elephant in the room: even if the faulty claim were true – it couldn’t have swung anything. Biden won the popular vote by seven million. As for the decisive states: he won Arizona by 10,000 (the report alleges 1,100 fraudulent votes), Georgia by 12,000 (400 alleged), and Wisconsin by 21,000 (500 alleged). The math never gets close.
But the stakes here are far greater than any one report. The Census decides how many congressional representatives your state gets and underpins nearly every official number you rely on. When a statistical agency starts producing propaganda, Justin argues, you're on the same road as Argentina, Greece, and Russia — and your trust in every government figure, from inflation to your representation in Congress, is on the line.
Subscribe — it's one number around here nobody's fudging:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com
Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

The Census Bureau just published a report claiming 24,000 noncitizens illegally voted in the 2020 election. In this episode of Diving In, Justin Wolfers takes the report apart and shows why it reads less like statistics and more like propaganda. The document has no author, no report number, and no named reviewers — a flashing red light that career statisticians have refused to sign their names to it.

Justin also does the math: matching 128 million voter records to citizenship files without Social Security numbers means guessing who's who. Apply the Census Bureau's own historical false-match rate of 0.146% and you'd "find" about 21,000 apparent noncitizen voters — even if every single person voted legally. Add outdated naturalization records (the report itself flagged and fixed 64,000 such cases) and the whole 24,000 could vanish. It's counting smoke alarms and calling them fires.

Trusted government statistics are an essential piece of infrastructure on which American prosperity depends. If the institutions that tell you where poverty is rising or how the economy is doing get bent to serve whoever's in power, you lose the ability to hold that power to account — and that's a cost you pay whether you voted or not.

Subscribe — it's a truth-finding institution with a much smaller error rate:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

Do sanctions on Iran actually work? Sixty years of the Cuba embargo say probably not.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent just announced what he's calling an "economic D-Day" against Iran — a threat aimed not just at Tehran but at every foreign firm, bank, trader, and shipper that does business with it: choose Iran, or choose access to the U.S. dollar. Justin Wolfers walks you through what was actually announced and then rewinds to 1963, where the Kennedy administration used almost identical language to "tighten the noose" around Cuba. Same playbook, six decades apart.

Here's the problem: the CIA studied the Cuba embargo for 20 years and concluded the sanctions "have not met any of their objectives." Castro stayed in power until 2008; the regime is still there today. Broader research is just as sobering — even optimistic studies find sanctions produce political change only about a third of the time, and almost never regime change against an entrenched authoritarian. One study of Iranian influencers found broad sanctions actually increased pro-government sentiment.

Why should you care? Because sanctions don't stop at the missile factory. There's no border checkpoint that lets in baby formula but not weapons. When you choke an economy, food, medicine, and family remittances get squeezed too — and every time America uses dollar access as an ultimatum, other countries get one more reason to build a system that doesn't need us, quietly eroding the financial leverage that makes your dollar so powerful in the first place.

Subscribe — it's the one economic lifeline we promise never to sever:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

Politicians keep promising to bring prices down. In this episode of The Professor Is In, Justin Wolfers explains why that's a terrible idea — and why it's not the same thing as slowing inflation. He walks through what actually happens if you force the price level down: wages have to fall too, stores go unprofitable, and the only reliable way to make it happen is to engineer a recession — possibly a depression. The sensible target isn't zero prices, but inflation low enough that you can forget about it.

Justin also digs into why your paycheck feels like it's losing the race even when, on average, it isn't. At least half of Americans saw wages beat prices last year — but the gains mostly go to people who switch jobs, and in today's low-hire, low-fire labor market, that door is barely open. So the raise you'd need to keep up is harder to reach right now, which could help explain why a record 71% of Americans expect prices to outrun their incomes (something that almost never actually happens).

What the $20 Burrito Debate Gets Wrong About Affordability https://omny.fm/shows/platypus-economics/burrito-gate-and-the-affordability-paradox-diving-in

🔒 Get 20% off DeleteMe by going to https://joindeleteme.com/WOLFERS and use code WOLFERS to protect your privacy! 🙌

Subscribe on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers