Lots of good explainers on why the big GDP number we're likely to see tomorrow doesn't actually mean we're doing OK. I thought I'd add a schematic graph 1/
What we know from lots of evidence is that we're having a "reverse square root recovery" — huge plunge, rapid partial snapback, much slower growth since: 2/
"3rd quarter growth" will actually be growth from the average of the 2nd q to the average of the 3rd — which means that it will mostly be telling us that there was rapid growth earlier this year, not that we're growing now: 3/
And of course it's even more misleading if the growth is expressed at an annual rate. Anyone who reports "the economy grew 35% in the third quarter" should be required to stand in the corner until the election is called 4/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Famous last words, but it does now look as if only blatant theft — which is possible! — can save Trump. But what will be the state of the nation on Jan. 20? The pandemic is exploding 1/
We desperately need strong measures right away — actually several weeks ago: mask mandates, targeted lockdowns, and more. So do you think lame-duck Trump, Republican governors, and so on will go along with urgent action? 2/
If you believe that I have an infrastructure week to sell you, with a degree from Trump University thrown in. In reality, we're more likely to have Proud Boys threatening to kill anyone acting responsibly 3/
I usually try to avoid political hot takes, bc what do I know? But I'm feeling both terrified and philosophical about the Barrett confirmation. Her chance to do immense harm will basically come *next week*. After that, she will be a GOP liability 1/
Right now, everything is pointing to a Dem tsunami. If you look at the median of state polls — which excludes dodgy outfits — it suggests something like a 9-point D swing since 2016, which would be a blowout 2/ nytimes.com/live/2020/pres…
Dave Wasserman, who is looking at a mass of district-level polls — and warned correctly about 2016 — is saying the same thing 3/
Many people have probably heard about the Great Barrington Declaration, denouncing social distancing and calling for "herd immunity." It's popular with the White House, and it's the product of a Koch-linked think tank 1/ nytimes.com/2020/10/19/hea…
So I've been going through articles from the American Institute for Economic Research, and found one from five weeks ago lauding South Dakota as "a fortress of liberty and hope protected from the grasps of overbearing politicians." 2/
Greg argues that Trump is finally paying a price for his nonstop lying. I guess; but I still don't think the media have fully learned how to deal with this 1/ washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/…
A trip down memory lane: I started writing for The Times during the 2000 campaign, in which GW Bush was obviously lying about taxes, Social Security, and more. But I was told that it wasn't OK to use the word "lie" 2/
Obviously we've gotten past that point. But you still have a lot of reports that normalize what's happening ("Candidates show sharp differences"). 3/
Good report, but I'm not sure that it does enough to inform readers about the background of the "economists" claiming that the Biden tax plan would be a disaster 1/ nytimes.com/2020/10/18/bus…
They're the same people who made extravagant claims about what the Trump tax cut would accomplish — claims supported by almost no reputable economists. The IGM poll: 2/ igmchicago.org/surveys/tax-re…
What should economists work on? What kind of work should be honored? Branko has some intriguing thoughts, some — but not all of which — I agree with 1/
He's right that economics should be trying to answer the big questions. On the other hand, research should focus on questions it can actually answer. Raymond Chandler in "The simple art of murder": 2/
PS, "other things being equal" — Chandler sounding like an economist! Anyway, something to be said for not biting off more than anyone knows how to chew 3/