Platypus Economics with Justin Wolfers

Donald Trump's trade representative Jamison Greer thinks about trade like a litigator: clients, injuries, bad actors, and remedies. Justin Wolfers takes Greer's own words from his recent interview with The Daily and shows why that worldview rests on muddled thinking about what trade actually is — and why it ends up costing you.
In this Diving In episode, Justin lays out the tells and discusses the bottom line. The numbers are blunt: New York Fed research finds roughly 90% of the tariff burden falls on U.S. firms and consumers, and low-income households bear a disproportionate share. Census data shows imports from China fell — but rose nearly one-for-one from the rest of the region. A lot of trade just changed addresses.
By the end you'll have a portable BS detector for any trade argument — from Trump, Vance, Greer, or your uncle at Thanksgiving.
The Daily Episode With Jamieson Greer: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/20/podcasts/the-daily/more-trump-tariffs-are-coming.html
🔒 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
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 our trade relationship with China and the eleven members of ASEAN.
Click through here: https://platypuseconomics.com/stata/trading_places_worksheet_6.pdf and you can work through the steps I followed, and build your statistical mastery.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of The Professor Is In, Justin Wolfers digs into the latest tariffs on Canada, answering subscriber questions and responding to comments from his earlier Diving In He addresses the suspicious timing of these new tariffs, break down the confusing dairy tariff-rate quota, and argues that total US-Canada dairy trade — about a billion dollars against hundreds of billions in overall trade — isn't worth blowing up either economy over.
On whether Canada should retaliate, Justin borrows Joan Robinson's "rocks in the harbour" metaphor: most of a tariff's cost lands on the country imposing it, so matching Trump would mostly hurt Canadians.
Finally, Justin discusses the biggest issue: trust. Once a president tears up a deal he signed, the value of his next signature is zero — and that discourages the deep, long-run cross-border investment that has defined North American trade over the past several decades.
Canadian Tariffs Diving In: https://omny.fm/shows/platypus-economics/the-biggest-economic-story-nobodys-talking-about-diving-in
Subscribe on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com
Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last summer, Congress passed one of the biggest cuts to food assistance in a generation. SNAP — the program a lot of folks still call food stamps — pays about $188 a month, roughly $6 a day for groceries like milk, eggs, rice, and peanut butter. It's not enough to live on, but it's the thing that lets a parent say yes to fruit this week instead of no.
In this Diving In episode, Justin walks you through what actually happened in four parts: what SNAP is and who leans on it, how the cuts ended up tucked inside Trump's 2025 budget law alongside big tax cuts for rich households, what the law actually changed, and what the data show now. The key detail: the new formula dings states for paying the wrong amount but not for wrongly turning eligible families away — a recipe for a slower, more suspicious system. By spring 2026, more than 4 million people had lost benefits, including an estimated 1.5 million children, even as nearly one in four adults still couldn't reliably afford enough food.
If your mum, your uncle, or your own household counts on this help, this is the shift that decides whether dinner is the thing that gives when the month runs long. Justin's takeaway: when politicians cut a program, don't just ask how much they saved — ask who lost what.
Subscribe on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com
Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trump's new 50% tariffs on Canada bypass USMCA — here's what it really means for you.
President Trump just hit a limited set of Canadian goods with 50% tariffs, and he did it by dusting off Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 — a law last used when Herbert Hoover was in the building. Justin Wolfers walks you through what actually happened, why it's stranger than it sounds, and why the direct cost to the U.S. is smaller than the message behind it.
Here's the twist: throughout the earlier trade wars, being compliant with the USMCA free trade agreement was your escape hatch — roughly 90% of Canadian goods came in duty-free. These new proclamations ignore that agreement entirely. Justin's quick-and-dirty math says the tariffs cover a bit more than $20 billion of imports, about 5% of what we buy from Canada — meaning maybe $50 to $150 a year on your household, plus higher prices from American firms that now face less competition. For Canada it's a real hit: close to 1% of GDP.
But the bigger story is confidence. If a signed trade deal only holds until the next presidential mood swing, it's not really a rule. Justin argues Canada is the test case — a warning to the roughly 60 countries facing new tariffs any week now: retaliate, and your trade deal may not save you.
Subscribe on YouTube 👉 https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com
Follow on Social Media @PlatypusEconomics and @JustinWolfers
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this latest episode of The Professor Is In, Justin answers listener questions and responds to comments from his latest episode dispelling the hype around Trump Accounts. Justin argues that Trump accounts are really two policies bundled together. There’s the attention-grabbing $1,000 payment for newborns, which has a genuine “kernel of genius” if the goal is to introduce families to saving, investing, and compound interest. But that piece is temporary. The larger, more durable part is a tax-advantaged wealth-transfer tool that primarily helps upper-middle-class families pass assets to their children.
Wolfers connects these accounts to other temporary Trump-era tax promises — on tips, overtime, and Social Security — and contrasts those short-lived populist gestures with more permanent tax cuts for the rich. The result, he argues, is a style of fiscal policy that looks pro-worker on the surface while delivering much larger long-run gains elsewhere.
Justin also explains why complexity is not just annoying — but economically harmful. When benefits are routed through a maze of tax rules, account types, and employer provisions, take-up falls. And the people most likely to miss out are often the families who can least afford to, making an already regressive system even more unequal.
Subscribe on YouTube https://youtube.com/platypuseconomics
Subscribe on Substack 👉 https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com
Diving Into Trump Accounts: https://omny.fm/shows/platypus-economics/the-truth-about-trump-accounts-read-the-fine-print-diving-in
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.