Platypus Economics with Justin Wolfers

The Census Bureau just published a report claiming 24,000 noncitizens illegally voted in the 2020 election. In this episode of Diving In, Justin Wolfers takes the report apart and shows why it reads less like statistics and more like propaganda. The document has no author, no report number, and no named reviewers — a flashing red light that career statisticians have refused to sign their names to it.

Justin also does the math: matching 128 million voter records to citizenship files without Social Security numbers means guessing who's who. Apply the Census Bureau's own historical false-match rate of 0.146% and you'd "find" about 21,000 apparent noncitizen voters — even if every single person voted legally. Add outdated naturalization records (the report itself flagged and fixed 64,000 such cases) and the whole 24,000 could vanish. It's counting smoke alarms and calling them fires.

Trusted government statistics are an essential piece of infrastructure on which American prosperity depends. If the institutions that tell you where poverty is rising or how the economy is doing get bent to serve whoever's in power, you lose the ability to hold that power to account — and that's a cost you pay whether you voted or not.

Subscribe — it's a truth-finding institution with a much smaller error rate:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

Do sanctions on Iran actually work? Sixty years of the Cuba embargo say probably not.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent just announced what he's calling an "economic D-Day" against Iran — a threat aimed not just at Tehran but at every foreign firm, bank, trader, and shipper that does business with it: choose Iran, or choose access to the U.S. dollar. Justin Wolfers walks you through what was actually announced and then rewinds to 1963, where the Kennedy administration used almost identical language to "tighten the noose" around Cuba. Same playbook, six decades apart.

Here's the problem: the CIA studied the Cuba embargo for 20 years and concluded the sanctions "have not met any of their objectives." Castro stayed in power until 2008; the regime is still there today. Broader research is just as sobering — even optimistic studies find sanctions produce political change only about a third of the time, and almost never regime change against an entrenched authoritarian. One study of Iranian influencers found broad sanctions actually increased pro-government sentiment.

Why should you care? Because sanctions don't stop at the missile factory. There's no border checkpoint that lets in baby formula but not weapons. When you choke an economy, food, medicine, and family remittances get squeezed too — and every time America uses dollar access as an ultimatum, other countries get one more reason to build a system that doesn't need us, quietly eroding the financial leverage that makes your dollar so powerful in the first place.

Subscribe — it's the one economic lifeline we promise never to sever:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

Politicians keep promising to bring prices down. In this episode of The Professor Is In, Justin Wolfers explains why that's a terrible idea — and why it's not the same thing as slowing inflation. He walks through what actually happens if you force the price level down: wages have to fall too, stores go unprofitable, and the only reliable way to make it happen is to engineer a recession — possibly a depression. The sensible target isn't zero prices, but inflation low enough that you can forget about it.

Justin also digs into why your paycheck feels like it's losing the race even when, on average, it isn't. At least half of Americans saw wages beat prices last year — but the gains mostly go to people who switch jobs, and in today's low-hire, low-fire labor market, that door is barely open. So the raise you'd need to keep up is harder to reach right now, which could help explain why a record 71% of Americans expect prices to outrun their incomes (something that almost never actually happens).

What the $20 Burrito Debate Gets Wrong About Affordability https://omny.fm/shows/platypus-economics/burrito-gate-and-the-affordability-paradox-diving-in

🔒 Get 20% off DeleteMe by going to https://joindeleteme.com/WOLFERS and use code WOLFERS to protect your privacy! 🙌

Subscribe on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

Bond yields have jumped from a little over 1% just after COVID to more than 5%, and Justin Wolfers walks you through why that matters at your kitchen table. The short version: the U.S. government is borrowing an enormous amount of money, lining up at the bank ahead of you and me, and that pushes the price of borrowing — the interest rate — up for everyone.

Justin sorts the story into three parts: why everyone's suddenly talking about the bond market, what Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is actually doing, and what it all signals. Two forces are driving yields up — heavy borrowing for the AI buildout, and a federal deficit at post-war highs outside of COVID and the Great Recession, even as the economy is doing okay. Markets are quietly asking whether the government is serious about paying them back.

Here's what's at stake for you: when the government crowds the credit line, the rate on your next mortgage, car loan, and credit card goes up, and a bigger interest bill each month means less cash to get by. Then there's Bessent's move to double a bond-buying program from $2 billion to $4 billion a day — routine plumbing, or an attempt to muffle the warning the bond market is sending? Justin's honest answer: right now, nobody knows.

Subscribe on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

A college student said a burrito shouldn't cost $20, and suddenly everyone seemed to be arguing about affordability. In this latest installment of Diving In, Justin Wolfers uses that burrito as a metaphor to untangle a real puzzle: 95% of Americans think there's an affordability crisis, two-thirds say groceries are unaffordable — yet by early 2026, every measure of real pay is above where it stood before the 2022 inflation burst. Both things can be true, and Justin shows you how.

Using five different real-wage measures, the Atlanta Fed's tracker of the same workers over time, and price and wage growth data from 12 countries over 60 years, he shows that when prices rise, your wages almost always catch up — and pretty quickly. But since most people experience wage and price hikes as two separate acts in a psychological drama, it can feel like your raise got stolen. Now, a record 71% of Americans believe their income won’t keep pace with prices. And the bundle of bad policies raising the price of your burrito is making matters worse.

Subscribe — it's the one upgrade that won't cost you the guac:
on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com

Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers

One more thing: When I create these videos, I often crunch a few numbers in Stata, with whom I’ve got a paid partnership. Today, I used it to explore the relationship between rising prices and wages in America and 11 other countries.

Click through here: https://platypuseconomics.com/stata/wages_and_inflation_oecd_worksheet.pdf if you'd like to follow along!