Justin Wolfers
@justinwolfers.bsky.social
Econ professor at Michigan ● Senior fellow, Brookings ● Intro econ textbook author ● Think Like An Economist podcast ● An economist willing to admit that the glass really is half full.
"This is a White House that is very focused on making sure the top end of town is doing okay. We do know that they've passed a budget that helps the rich. We do know that tariffs hurt the poor. We do know that when an economy slows down, that hurts working and middle class families the most."
November 11, 2025 at 12:52 PM
"This is a White House that is very focused on making sure the top end of town is doing okay. We do know that they've passed a budget that helps the rich. We do know that tariffs hurt the poor. We do know that when an economy slows down, that hurts working and middle class families the most."
In case it's not obvious, none of this is true. He's either innumerate, or lying.
November 11, 2025 at 3:24 AM
In case it's not obvious, none of this is true. He's either innumerate, or lying.
Facts would like a word.
November 11, 2025 at 2:31 AM
Facts would like a word.
Two truths can be true at once: AI may be utterly transformative; Wall Street may be in over its skis. For your 401(k), the lesson from the dot‑com era: diversify broadly so you catch the wave without betting the house on Pets dot com 2.0.
November 10, 2025 at 10:56 PM
Two truths can be true at once: AI may be utterly transformative; Wall Street may be in over its skis. For your 401(k), the lesson from the dot‑com era: diversify broadly so you catch the wave without betting the house on Pets dot com 2.0.
He said: "Prices are down under Trump.'
Me: "It is quite literally false. There's not a single way you can interpret a word that the man's saying..as being remotely reflective of either what we're seeing in data from all across the country or in people's everyday lives."
Me: "It is quite literally false. There's not a single way you can interpret a word that the man's saying..as being remotely reflective of either what we're seeing in data from all across the country or in people's everyday lives."
November 10, 2025 at 5:46 PM
He said: "Prices are down under Trump.'
Me: "It is quite literally false. There's not a single way you can interpret a word that the man's saying..as being remotely reflective of either what we're seeing in data from all across the country or in people's everyday lives."
Me: "It is quite literally false. There's not a single way you can interpret a word that the man's saying..as being remotely reflective of either what we're seeing in data from all across the country or in people's everyday lives."
Remember that insurance is actually a thing you hope never to use, and then read this critique.
November 10, 2025 at 3:36 PM
Remember that insurance is actually a thing you hope never to use, and then read this critique.
I can't tell you how many interviews I've done where I've been asked: If Trump's policies are so problematic, why are U.S. stocks rising so rapidly.
A bit of international context illustrates the real issue here.
U.S. stocks have dramatically underperformed other advanced economies.
A bit of international context illustrates the real issue here.
U.S. stocks have dramatically underperformed other advanced economies.
November 10, 2025 at 3:15 PM
I can't tell you how many interviews I've done where I've been asked: If Trump's policies are so problematic, why are U.S. stocks rising so rapidly.
A bit of international context illustrates the real issue here.
U.S. stocks have dramatically underperformed other advanced economies.
A bit of international context illustrates the real issue here.
U.S. stocks have dramatically underperformed other advanced economies.
It can be hard to do math in your head, while standing up, on national television. Nerve-wracking, too. But even so, in twenty seconds on the air, I did a better job than the President in costing his latest idea and figuring out whether his new idea of a $2,000 rebate check will work. (It won't.)
November 10, 2025 at 1:51 PM
It can be hard to do math in your head, while standing up, on national television. Nerve-wracking, too. But even so, in twenty seconds on the air, I did a better job than the President in costing his latest idea and figuring out whether his new idea of a $2,000 rebate check will work. (It won't.)
"The punters have never felt more dissatisfied with the direction of economic policy than they feel right now."
November 10, 2025 at 12:52 PM
"The punters have never felt more dissatisfied with the direction of economic policy than they feel right now."
I can’t swear on TV — but my face does it for me. You can probably guess what it just said about the President’s latest nonsense.
November 10, 2025 at 2:13 AM
I can’t swear on TV — but my face does it for me. You can probably guess what it just said about the President’s latest nonsense.
Taxing Americans through tariffs and then returning more to them through rebate checks is...
November 10, 2025 at 12:48 AM
Taxing Americans through tariffs and then returning more to them through rebate checks is...
When prices rise because *demand* is hot, wages usually follow. When prices rise because tariffs raise costs -- a *supply* shock -- there’s no reason paychecks catch up. That’s why tariff inflation hurts a whole heckuva lot more. It's a permanent reduction in living standards.
November 9, 2025 at 5:46 PM
When prices rise because *demand* is hot, wages usually follow. When prices rise because tariffs raise costs -- a *supply* shock -- there’s no reason paychecks catch up. That’s why tariff inflation hurts a whole heckuva lot more. It's a permanent reduction in living standards.
The market’s AI run-up yields two plausible stories:
1) A genuine productivity revolution that lifts living standards;
2) A classic overhype that ends like 2000.
Surely the right stance isn’t certainty; it’s humility, diversification, and an eye on the long run.
1) A genuine productivity revolution that lifts living standards;
2) A classic overhype that ends like 2000.
Surely the right stance isn’t certainty; it’s humility, diversification, and an eye on the long run.
November 9, 2025 at 12:52 PM
The market’s AI run-up yields two plausible stories:
1) A genuine productivity revolution that lifts living standards;
2) A classic overhype that ends like 2000.
Surely the right stance isn’t certainty; it’s humility, diversification, and an eye on the long run.
1) A genuine productivity revolution that lifts living standards;
2) A classic overhype that ends like 2000.
Surely the right stance isn’t certainty; it’s humility, diversification, and an eye on the long run.
"isn't that just the conversation we've been having now for years, which is how does someone look the American people in the eye and lie to them? How should you respond as someone in the media? And how should I respond as an economist?"
November 8, 2025 at 10:56 PM
"isn't that just the conversation we've been having now for years, which is how does someone look the American people in the eye and lie to them? How should you respond as someone in the media? And how should I respond as an economist?"
Econ 101 midterm question: Based on what you know about risk pools and adverse selection in healthcare markets, will giving people money instead of giving them money to buy health insurance lead these markets to function more effectively, or will it just lead more people to be uninsured?
November 8, 2025 at 6:10 PM
Econ 101 midterm question: Based on what you know about risk pools and adverse selection in healthcare markets, will giving people money instead of giving them money to buy health insurance lead these markets to function more effectively, or will it just lead more people to be uninsured?
Let's talk about Trump's tariffs and the constitution. On Slate's What Next podcast.
slate.com/podcasts/wha...
slate.com/podcasts/wha...
November 8, 2025 at 5:46 PM
Let's talk about Trump's tariffs and the constitution. On Slate's What Next podcast.
slate.com/podcasts/wha...
slate.com/podcasts/wha...
Trump's tariffs are hurting us in two ways:
First, the obvious: Higher costs → either lower profits or higher prices.
Second, more subtle (perhaps bigger): We’ve signaled we’re an unreliable partner, so allies are reorganizing supply chains to avoid us. That's hard to unwind.
First, the obvious: Higher costs → either lower profits or higher prices.
Second, more subtle (perhaps bigger): We’ve signaled we’re an unreliable partner, so allies are reorganizing supply chains to avoid us. That's hard to unwind.
November 8, 2025 at 1:51 PM
Trump's tariffs are hurting us in two ways:
First, the obvious: Higher costs → either lower profits or higher prices.
Second, more subtle (perhaps bigger): We’ve signaled we’re an unreliable partner, so allies are reorganizing supply chains to avoid us. That's hard to unwind.
First, the obvious: Higher costs → either lower profits or higher prices.
Second, more subtle (perhaps bigger): We’ve signaled we’re an unreliable partner, so allies are reorganizing supply chains to avoid us. That's hard to unwind.
"Mate, if any of those numbers were true, you know, we could all be on yachts right now. It'd be terrific. I don't know why the bloke doesn't just say eleventy gajillion and get on with it. When you're making numbers up, just be transparent about it."
November 8, 2025 at 12:52 PM
"Mate, if any of those numbers were true, you know, we could all be on yachts right now. It'd be terrific. I don't know why the bloke doesn't just say eleventy gajillion and get on with it. When you're making numbers up, just be transparent about it."
If the Supreme Court rules against the President, expect it "move our chaotic trade war that was really chaotic-and-settled, into merely chaotic, back to extremely chaotic again."
November 7, 2025 at 10:56 PM
If the Supreme Court rules against the President, expect it "move our chaotic trade war that was really chaotic-and-settled, into merely chaotic, back to extremely chaotic again."
In the 2000s, just ten percent of Americans believed the government was doing a poor job on economic policy. Today, that's 64%, higher than at any point in our history, beating the oil shocks, wage and price controls, the great inflation, any major recession, financial crisis or pandemic.
November 7, 2025 at 8:55 PM
In the 2000s, just ten percent of Americans believed the government was doing a poor job on economic policy. Today, that's 64%, higher than at any point in our history, beating the oil shocks, wage and price controls, the great inflation, any major recession, financial crisis or pandemic.
"it's a symptom of a deep and abiding dysfunction that Republicans, despite holding the presidency, the Senate and the House, can't fund the government and can't even get themselves to get together in a room to strike a deal."
November 7, 2025 at 5:46 PM
"it's a symptom of a deep and abiding dysfunction that Republicans, despite holding the presidency, the Senate and the House, can't fund the government and can't even get themselves to get together in a room to strike a deal."
It's the first Friday of the month and we got no jobs data for the first time in 77 years. Hold me.
November 7, 2025 at 3:26 PM
It's the first Friday of the month and we got no jobs data for the first time in 77 years. Hold me.
"there's a whole lot of public servants right now... drawn to the job by desire to make the world a better place, who are feeling... that maybe the world doesn't love them very much. And they're worried they're not going to get the wages they not only need, but the law says that they're owed."
November 7, 2025 at 1:51 PM
"there's a whole lot of public servants right now... drawn to the job by desire to make the world a better place, who are feeling... that maybe the world doesn't love them very much. And they're worried they're not going to get the wages they not only need, but the law says that they're owed."
"To me, as an economist.. the much deeper, much harder question is, what is the national emergency? President Trump claims that it's bilateral trade deficits. If you talk to any economist with a pulse, they'll tell you that bilateral trade deficits are the most uninteresting thing in the world."
November 7, 2025 at 12:52 PM
"To me, as an economist.. the much deeper, much harder question is, what is the national emergency? President Trump claims that it's bilateral trade deficits. If you talk to any economist with a pulse, they'll tell you that bilateral trade deficits are the most uninteresting thing in the world."
"Well, congratulations, America. We did it. They said you'd never do it, but we've gone 35 and a half days without a government."
November 7, 2025 at 1:48 AM
"Well, congratulations, America. We did it. They said you'd never do it, but we've gone 35 and a half days without a government."