Letter opposing Donald Trump's re-election signed by 670 economists, including seven Nobel laureates:
George Akerlof (2001)
Roger Myerson (2007)
Peter Diamond (2010)
Christopher Sims (2011)
Alvin Roth (2012)
Oliver Hart (2016)
Paul Milgrom (2020)
sites.google.com/site/econagain…
Interestingly, a similar letter in 2016 was signed by 794 economists
sites.google.com/site/economist…
To be fair, looks like the 2016 letter was initially released with "only" 370 names, and then grew as time went on and the letter circulated more broadly. Same might happen again. washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/w…
OK separately there are also at least *two* affirmatively pro-Biden/Harris (not just anti-Trump) letters from economists.
Here's one from 13 Nobel laureates (there was a similar pro-Clinton Nobelists-only letter in 2016, w/ at least 20 names by the end): axios.com/joe-biden-nobe…
Here's another pro-Biden/Harris letter from ~250 economists: scribd.com/document/47601…
I would love to run an analysis to find patterns among all these lists this time, as I did in 2016...days like this I really wish I had an RA!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Catherine Rampell

Catherine Rampell Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @crampell

21 Oct
lol nothing Trump loves more than using books or big stacks of paper as props when he can't deliver on substance
Another one (possibly also of blank pages)
Read 4 tweets
21 Oct
USCIS employees have been told that new "Fraud Awareness" training will be mandatory for all USCIS adjudicators. Appears to be part of a broader resource shift away from providing immigration services (as the agency name implies) and finding excuses to deny those services.
USCIS allocated more than double the amount of resources to fraud detection in its biennial fee reviews that accompanied the respective FY 2016 and 2020 fee rules. Staffing on Fraud Detection & National Security has also more than doubled from FY 2016/2017 to FY 2019/2020
Meanwhile, of course, the agency has been crying poverty, and spent the spring/summer threatening to furlough 70% of its workforce without a congressional bailout.
Read 4 tweets
20 Oct
A chart-based tweed-thread on my column today, which argues that Trump's political agenda has backfired -- he's driven Americans away from his major policy views, including immigration, trade, healthcare. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/…
First, immigration.
Trump has forced a referendum on immigration, and, as @AmericasVoice put it, Americans sided w/ immigrants. Nearly 8 in 10 Americans (77%) now think immigration is good for the country, the highest share since Gallup began asking this question two decades ago
Additionally, the share of Americans who say they want increased immigration exceeds those who want it reduced — the first time this has been true since Gallup began asking in the 1960s.
Read 15 tweets
16 Oct
One odd thing about calling more attention to Trump's anti-immigrant actions as an obvious campaign tactic is that Americans have become more pro-immigrant since Trump took office /1
For the first time since Gallup began asking about it in the 1960s, the percentage of Americans who want increased immigration exceeds the percentage who want decreased immigration. /2
news.gallup.com/poll/313106/am…
A rising share of Americans also say immigrants strengthen, rather than burden, the U.S., per Pew /3 pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020… Image
Read 5 tweets
15 Oct
JFC. No, China isn't going to pay for U.S. fiscal stimulus, just as Mexico isn't paying for the wall. Do any voters still fall for this?
If Trump argues China will "pay" via tariffs, note that at least *four* studies have found that Trump's tariffs so far have been either entirely or almost entirely paid by Americans nber.org/papers/w26610
hbs.edu/faculty/Public…
nber.org/papers/w25638
bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/upl…
Maybe Trump means China will instead "pay" for our stimulus by continuing to lend the U.S. government money at near-zero interest rates...if so, he may want to look at recent trends in U.S. Treasury holdings, as well as recent rhetoric out of Beijing reuters.com/article/us-chi…
Read 4 tweets
15 Oct
College enrollment fell this fall, with freshman enrollment down 16.1% across the board. At community colleges, first-time enrollment fell 22.7%.
Only for-profit freshman enrollment went up, 3.7% nscresearchcenter.org/stay-informed/
Usually you'd expect college enrollment increases in a recession, as workers seek shelter from the bad economy and upgrade their skills. But this is of course a different kind of recession. Presumably a lot of students are waiting for in-person classes to return.
Bigger declines among Whites, and also among men. Note that women already outnumbered men at colleges, so enrollment changes this year will skew the gender balance further.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!