Getting quoted as an economics expert in the New York Times or Wall Street Journal isn’t about being insightful or thoughtful. It’s not even about coming up with clever turns of phrase. Having some elite credentials definitely helps — an attachment to Harvard is especially useful. But the single thing that makes you most likely to be quoted as an expert is the simple fact of having previously been quoted as an expert in these papers. How else can you explain why Larry Summers has appeared more than 150 times since 2020?

It certainly has nothing to do with being correct. Because as Dylan Gyauch-Lewis points out, these influential outlets also continue to turn to pro-austerity Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff — despite the fact that the academic research paper which made his reputation was found in 2013 to have been based on an Excel error. That’s right, it was determined more than a decade ago that his most famous paper was based on serious Microsoft Excel calculation errors that altered his conclusions. He even admitted it! And yet, he’s still one of the most-quoted official voices on economic policy in our most important newspapers.

Make it make sense.

So much terrible news washes over us every week that it can be easy to lose sight of the basic and important fact that some things do get better over time. To illustrate, admire the chart below, recently published by the Economic Innovation Group, which shows the rate of workplace injuries and illnesses on a long and fairly steady decline since the 1970s. In fact, today, the rate is just a third of what it was in 1980.

This curve may be a bit surprising given the steady decline in union power over these same years, but there’s a pretty straightforward reason: national workplace safety standards first took effect in the 1970s, and… federal regulations work. Unfortunately, recent Supreme Court decisions may undermine the workings of these kinds of regulations, which is a reminder that even though things can get better… they can also get worse.  

There’s been lots of debate about the role of corporate greed in elevating inflation rates over the past few years. But even those who agree that corporations have taken advantage of pandemic supply disruptions to gouge prices and boost profits have tended to struggle to come up with concrete suggestions for what to do about it.

And that’s a big part of why Isabella Weber’s thinking on how to control grain prices is so valuable: it’s clear, concrete, and appears much within the realm of the possible. Specifically, Weber is now proposing to establish a grain reserve, similar to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, that could be used to buffer price and supply shocks by selling grain when prices spike. As The Guardian explains, “In effect, a grain reserve could set a ceiling on prices to protect consumers, while establishing a floor to shield farmers when grain prices collapse.” It’s an elegant, practical solution to fluctuating food prices that is worth serious consideration.

Civic Action
119 1st Avenue South Suite 320
Seattle, WA 98014
United States

If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, please unsubscribe.