Jesse Rothstein

Reminder! First review date is Feb. 28 - just two days from now.

Moreover, since the relevant question is the proposed rate vs. status quo, the conflict only arises if the proposed rate is so far past the revenue-maximizing rate as to bring in less revenue than status quo policy. Again, I don't see a reason to think that is the case.

Your argument is premised on the idea that the proposed rate is above the revenue maximizing rate. If it isn't, there's no argument - all of the aspects you consider push in the same direction. I don't see a reason to engage with the argument absent some reason to think it is empirically relevant.

This is the exact Laffer move:

Step 1: You accept in principle of course that there is a revenue maximizing tax rate t*, and further increases beyond that would reduce revenue.

Step 2: Let's assume, with 0 evidence, that your proposed t is above t*.

Step 3: Ergo, your proposed t is too high.

Precheck is open now at LAX Southwest terminal.

Re-upping for the long weekend crowd. Please apply! The first review date is Feb. 28.

swadlr swadlr provides access to the EPI State of Working America Data Library (SWADL) API. Examples Use swadlr if you need to programmatically retrieve a time series from SWADL:

Want to explore the EPI State of Working America Data Library in #RStats?

The 🐣 swadlr 🐣 package lets you search available datasets and pull time series directly

economic.github.io/swadlr/

📢 Predoc Opportunity

I'm hiring a full-time predoc to work with me at UC Berkeley, supporting my research on labor economics, the economics of education, and public policy.

jesse-rothstein.com/rothstein_pr...

Please pass on to anyone who might be interested.

#econsky #econ_ra

Agree.

In addition (changing the subject), I really like the concept of “clarity trap.” It might be the best summary I’ve seen of what is wrong with Econ 101ism.

These people are ghouls.

Great thread.

🚨📢 Call for papers - IV Workshop on Economics of Education, Valle Nevado 🇨🇱⛷️

📅 August 18-21
📍Valle Nevado, Chile

Keynotes by Josh Goodman (
@buwheelock.bsky.social ) and Chris Neilson (Yale)

Submit by March 6 👇
bit.ly/49QSsd3

@joshua-goodman.com @christopherneilson.bsky.social

Funding Opportunity!

We are now taking applications for our Early Career Research Awards. These awards provide support to recent PhD earners researching policy and employment issues. Those working in economics, sociology, public policy, political science, and related fields may apply.

#Econsky

Please consider supporting the @capolicylab.bsky.social!

Help us welcome Dr. Monique E. Davis (@moniqueedavis-phd.bsky.social) as our newest economist! Dr. Davis holds a Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis–St. Paul. Her work centers on examining structural inequalities between marginalized and privileged groups.

#Econsky

American Economic Association AREUEA Poster Session Poster Session Hosted By: American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association Chair: Lu Han, University of Wisconsin-Madison AEA Poster Session Poster Session Hosted By: American Economic Association AFA PhD Student Poster Session...

@assameeting.bsky.social attendees, join the Institute, LERA, & @neaecon.bsky.social in celebrating the many contributions of Bill Spriggs to econ profession & policy at a luncheon on Jan 4 and two paper sessions. Search “Spriggs" at https://bit.ly/4ohwkg4 for details 

This article is well worth reading.

I love this languages map! Would love to see one for LA also.

Is the SAT serving the mission of public universities?

CSHE Senior Associate Saul Geiser tackles this question in an op-ed for Inside Higher Ed. Drawing on his ROPS paper, Geiser argues that "treating the test as a neutral measure of merit is an illusion."

www.insidehighered.com/opinion/view...

The California Policy Lab provides independent, practical research that helps our government make better decisions and improve more lives. In this interview, Prof. Till von Wachter explains CPL's research showing the LA wildfires impacted people both inside and outside the directly impacted areas.

Tune in to @kqedforum.bsky.social at 9a tmrw to hear me talk rising student loan delinquencies

@jrothst.bsky.social makes excellent points & language is important. I'm estimating "full employment" ~given~ cruel immigration policy. To measure slack, Fed compares actual labor mkt to estimate of current "full emp" (also dicey language as that estimate generally means UR is high for some groups).

Final note: Of course, this all presumes we know what employment growth has been. We don’t. The Republican failure to pass a budget means that the data aren’t being collected or reported. That makes it much harder to ensure that policy matches to conditions. The Fed can only go on vibes. 7/7

So yes, the Fed should take account of this, and not interpret job growth in the low 5 digits as a sign of a catastrophic collapse in demand. But it is nevertheless bad, not good, news and a sign of policy that is not only illegal and inhumane but also bad economics.

That is, the slowdown in job growth consistent with full employment is direct evidence that immigrants take jobs that otherwise wouldn’t exist in this country, not jobs that natives would otherwise get. And that our (lawless, inhumane) immigration policy is making us all poorer.

To the extent there is an economic justification for the immigration crackdown, it has to be that immigrants take jobs that would otherwise be held by native workers. The evidence has long made clear that isn’t true. But if it were, a reduction in immigration wouldn’t reduce employment growth.

But the low employment growth is not good - it is bad. It means that our economy isn’t growing as fast as it otherwise would, and we aren’t getting wealthier the way we otherwise would. It is a sign that the administration’s (lawless, inhumane) immigration policies are making us all poorer.

@wendyedelberg.bsky.social is (of course) right that we need to recalibrate expectations of what employment growth we can expect in an economy where demand matches supply. If the Fed tried to maintain previous employment growth via monetary policy, it would just create inflation.

This is a good thread. But I want to take exception to the naming of low unemployment and low employment growth as “good.” A thread of my own: 1/7

Sign says "We're HIRING"

The California Policy Lab is hiring a Researcher/Senior Researcher, focused on health & safety net in California: capolicylab.org/careers/rese...