File this under "Yet more evidence that firm location decisions are based on region-specific advantages, not economic development subsidies" wral.com/why-geography-doome…

“Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man.” —Walter E. Williams

Takeaways from our new paper (with Jha, Kala, and @NeumarkEcon): When estimating minimum wage effects on restaurant employment: 🔹 City size matters 🔹 Monopsony is better proxied by labor market fluidity than by employer concentration nber.org/papers/w33862 1/5

My paper with Jha, Kala and @NeumarkEcon is now published at JUE. Min wages reduce restaurant jobs in most places, but bite less in larger cities. Ignoring city size overstates how much monopsony power softens these adverse employment effects. Open access: doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2026.1…

What do diff-in-diff event-study designs really tell us about the employment effects of min wages? My new paper with @NeumarkEcon tackles this using the stacked design of Cengiz-@arindube-@attilalindner-@benzipperer and the related LP-DiD design in Dube-Lindner’s HLE chapter. 🧵

This will go down as the greatest 2026 World Cup interview

39 years ago today, President Ronald Reagan stood before the Berlin Wall and addressed a challenge to the general secretary of the Soviet Union in a speech crafted by Hoover fellow @P_M_Robinson: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

How many years would the typical American household have to work to pay the taxes that Elon already pays?

Thomas Sowell: “I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

no, they didn't.

About 10 years ago there was a broad, bipartisan consensus, from President Obama to Paul Ryan, that occupational licensing was a huge millstone around workers' necks. Then the issue just...disappeared. Yet states keep adding licenses. Starting next year in Colorado:

The story here is not Jerry Seinfeld or what he said about Palestine. The story here is that for 3 years Jews are being hounded by pro Palesitinian maniacs who go around with their phones harassing Jews for content on TikTok.

Imagine if this had been the response to the introduction of the tractor. via Toronto Star

20 years ago, An Inconvenient Truth put climate change at the center of global debate, shaping politics, influencing leaders, and inspiring a generation of activists. Two decades later, we can assess not just its impact, but its accuracy. Many of the film’s most alarming predictions did not materialize, while many of the policies it inspired have proven costly and ineffective. The lesson? Panic is a poor guide for public policy. Focusing on innovation, adaptation, and economic development can do far more to help both people and the climate—at a fraction of the cost. financialpost.com/opinion/bj…

If you want a sense of how nutty this is, they couldn’t get Zucman to sign on

If Ayn Rand had invented @PikettyWIL, critics would have said she created an unbelievably ridiculous supervillain, writes @veroderugy at @reason. But his idiotic plan for global economic controls isn't fiction, alas... reason.com/2026/06/11/the-ec…

1979 comparison update.

Milton Friedman: “Everywhere and at all times, economic progress has meant far more to the poor than to the rich.” “Wherever progress has been achieved, it has relieved the poor from back-breaking toil. It has also enabled them to enjoy the comforts and conveniences that had always been available to the rich.”

People, I want to point out that I dont like Piketty's ideas (no shit) but I wont ding the man for finally bringing into English what he has been saying in French for years. I respect that. As much as I dislike his views, I respect the move of pushing big ideas. What I will point out is what no one wants to listen to that I have been saying (in French, English and German) for years. Piketty often arrives at "big ideas" with really sloppy work. I have four big papers on inequality measurements pre-1960 that deal meticulously with aspects of the data works: assumptions, data quality, theoretical underpinnings, statistical estimation techniques. They span a good decade of work. The big takeaway is that none of what was initially advanced "factually" in Capital in the 21st Century or Capital and Ideology to justify the big ideas hold. Inequality in America pre-1943 was massively lower; the trend was different; the golden age of equality was not as golden nor was it tied to tax policy that much; inequality was falling from 1870 to 1943 (my forthcoming book), the rise post-1980 in inequality is much smaller than depicted, the welfare moderated massively post-tax inequality rise since 1960, social security acted as a massive wealth equalizer. All of these facts which are based on higher precision (but not perfect) statements undermine all the "big ideas" he moved forward. Moreover, all the errors in fact fit his preferred ideas. I have pointed out that some of my findings irked me as a classical liberal (notably with respect to the welfare state and social security). But the facts are stubborn buddies to hang out with. And what is more annoying is that none of corners cut were necessary. As I pointed out in a first review of my peer-reviewed papers which I wrote for City Journal: none of the findings I make preclude positively the call for greater income and wealth inequality. The first image is what I wrote back then on the matter. I wrote a similar thing in German for @faznet (I will post the translation in reply). That is even more frustrating than the errors themselves because they seem to have brought into existence as errors for the purposes of easing the case he wants to make -- a case which is not automatically invalidated by the data. Normative positions can be held without the need for positive prior outcomes. Ultimately, the list of errors has been ignored and people talk about the "big ideas" without reference to the foundations used to bring them about. That is what I wish people would think about. That the factual foundations are shaky even if I do not think they are necessary to make the "big ideas". Things can be discussed separately!

This is one of my favorite papers to teach rent-seeking and the relationship to economic growth. Its well argued and essentially also introduces multiple equilibria logic to students in simple mathematics.

It is an unmitigated disaster. These levels of the NASDAQ have not been seen since May 5, 2026.