Tim Bartik

We are currently seeking organizational and individual support for our FY27 Funding Recommendation Letter and hope you will join us in asking for more robust funding for BLS. We are asking Congress to approve $754 million for BLS in FY27 which is a 5% increase over FY26. These funds will allow BLS to train new staff, implement delayed modernization efforts, and sustain response rates in multiple programs. We are accepting sign-ons from both organizations and individuals no later than COB Wednesday March 4. Please select the appropriate link below to read the full letter and sign-on.

Care about Americans, employment, earnings, consumer prices, your local or our national economy?

@usbls.bsky.social empowers us to better recognize these & make decisions.

Consider signing onto Friends of BLS's new letter to Congress re its budget.

And spread the word.

Many workers have missed shifts without jobs being destroyed making it challenging to measure labor impacts with conventional sources.

We use real-time daily data from Homebase to measure impacts. Thanks to UChicago and Homebase for making the data available.
#EconSky #NumbersDay

The cap on the event was increased threefold this afternoon, so hopefully you now can register.

Also, if for some reason the organizers cannot expand the event online audience, the event page says they will post a recording of the event.

Sorry, I just saw that. I am not in charge of the event, but I will communicate with the event organizers to see if additional virtual slots can be added

Other speakers include computer historians, as well as other family members with more personal stories of the ENIAC inventors, Pres Eckert and John Mauchly.

I am speaking, as the son of Jean Jennings Bartik, who was one of the six ENIAC programmers (all women!). The keynote is by Kathy Kleiman, who runs the ENIAC Programmers Project, and who deserves much of the credit for helping bring the hidden history of the ENIAC programmers into the light.

ENIAC Day February 15, 2026 is ENIAC's 80th Anniversary.

A list of speakers for this 2 hour event can be found here, halfway down the page: eniacday.org/events

This is a sign up for "ENIAC Day": the 80th anniversary of the Feb 15 1946 first public demonstration of the ENIAC, which led to the modern computer industry. Signing up for the virtual version of the event is free.

Opinion | Investing in tuition-free college can be a good economic bet for Michigan - Bridge Michigan Having more educated workers strengthens communities, making it easier to attract new businesses and enabling existing employers to improve productivity and expand.

Our own @mmilleradams.bsky.social and @timbartik.bsky.social have a new piece in @bridgemi.com examining the economics of tuition-free college. By their reckoning, the cost-benefit ratio of free college is nearly unmatched.

Read more: bridgemi.com/guest-commen...

#highereducation, #michigan,

Opinion | Investing in tuition-free college can be a good economic bet for Michigan - Bridge Michigan Having more educated workers strengthens communities, making it easier to attract new businesses and enabling existing employers to improve productivity and expand.

bridgemi.com/guest-commen...

Study finds Rx Kids program supports families, drives jobs and income growth

With funding for Michigan’s Rx Kids program back in the news, it’s good to look at the data.

Read our report on the economic effects of #RxKids in Flint here: www.upjohn.org/research-hig...

#Econsky, #MI, #Flint, #Michigan

Figure shows cost per job created of tax incentives at $436K, versus $155K for infrastructure, $82K for training, & $78K for business advice.

These services can have less than one-third the cost per job created for local residents compared to tax incentives.

Federal and state governments can help solve the employment problems of people in distressed places to spur equitable growth How to best target economically distressed places with job creation programs and what job creation programs are most effective.

As I have argued, the most cost-effective ways to help distressed places is to provide "customized services" rather than business tax incentives. Such services include infrastructure and training. dev-equitablegrowth.pantheonsite.io/federal-and-...

"To cushion trade shocks, it calls for the losers to be compensated financially, and for governments to invest in infrastructure and education to make economically depressed regions more attractive to outside companies." I obviously agree.

I obviously particularly liked the paragraph that begins: "One of the general principles of the London Consensus is “Growth matters, but so does place.”...

Great article on a new book.

A senior academic using mentoring as leverage to obtain sex is a contemptible abuser of power.

Underlying lesson is that sensible economic development policies depends upon targeting distressed places, and coordinating with workforce development and housing policies that will target jobs and allow for needed housing.

At the extremes, targeting highly distressed places & having housing supply accommodate growth can increase benefit-cost ratio > sixfold compared to targeting booming places with restrictive housing supply -- BC ratio is 4.27 in former place vs. 0.66 in latter place.

This figure shows that benefit-cost ratio of an economic development project varies from 1.32 to 2.03 to 2.56, depending upon whether housing price responses in area to population increases are high, median, or low.

If the housing price increase due to population is high, BCt ratio is only 1.32, and BC ratio almost doubles to 2.56 if housing price effect is low. Higher housing price response chokes off job growth, & transfers benefits from workers to property owners.

In addition, project benefits vary with whether housing prices go up relatively little or a lot with population boosts. Higher price responses drive up local costs, which reduces multiplier effects, and skews benefits towards property owners and away from boosting earnings per cap of local workers.

The figure shows that the benefit-cost ratio of a particular economic development project varies from 3.45 to 2.03 to 1.10, depending upon whether the area's employment rate response to new jobs is high, at the national median, or low.

For this project, its benefit-cost ratio in highly distressed place is 3.45, because job creation has larger effects on boosting employment rates. In booming place, BC ratio only 1.10, because new jobs mostly just boost population -- benefits are lower and skewed more towards property.

In the essay, I present some simulations showing that benefit-cost ratio of econ dev projects varies greatly with whether area is distressed (has low baseline employment rate) or the area has better workforce programs to target jobs at non-employed. Benefit-cost ratio can plausibly vary threefold.

Many past development policies, such as bulldozing neighborhoods for Urban Renewal or highways, failed because even if they "worked", mainly aided property owners rather than original residents. If we want broad support for development, it must boost real earnings per cap of original residents.

I have a new essay on place-based economic development policies as "broadly-shared abundance policy" at Site Selection magazine: siteselection.com/incentives-s... Key pt: econ dev policies can boost abundance IF targeted at distressed areas/non-employed, & if local housing policies accommodate.

These findings are policy relevant because RxKids has been expanded to other Michigan cities, including Kalamazoo. And recent state of Michigan budget adds $270 million to further expand program. So issue of what it does for all Michigan residents, not just direct beneficiaries, is important.

Also, although given Flint context, transfer benefits are highly concentrated on lowest income quintile. But the program's benefits are broadly spread by increased spending and increased jobs and employment rates to all income quintiles, and particular bottom 60% of income distribution.

Our model assumes that the program's cash benefits otherwise would not provide Michigan benefits. But even if we switch to tax financing, benefits in higher state per capita incomes would be 1.78 times the program's transfer costs.

Core findings: depending upon model used, effect on total state personal income is 60% to 300% greater than the direct cash payments. Per capita income goes up by 2.4 times the cost of the program. Labor market benefits from job creation are actually greater than direct benefits of transfers.