Betsey Stevenson
@betseystevenson.bsky.social
Former Member of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers & Chief Economist at Labor. Current academic economist at Michigan. Always an economist at home.
Millions of food insecure Americans are being treated like bargaining chips in a political showdown. They have no political power, no lobbyists, and no way to influence whether the government reopens. Using them as leverage is cruel.
November 9, 2025 at 4:26 PM
Millions of food insecure Americans are being treated like bargaining chips in a political showdown. They have no political power, no lobbyists, and no way to influence whether the government reopens. Using them as leverage is cruel.
People aren't happy with the state of the economy and the real weakness for the GOP is that independents are less happy about it than they were a year ago. You can't just lie to people about energy prices, they will open their heating bill and see the difference pretty clearly.
November 7, 2025 at 8:25 PM
People aren't happy with the state of the economy and the real weakness for the GOP is that independents are less happy about it than they were a year ago. You can't just lie to people about energy prices, they will open their heating bill and see the difference pretty clearly.
Reposted by Betsey Stevenson
Don’t believe anyone who tells you that intelligence shows anything “without a doubt,” but even if the intelligence was water-tight, this strike was still murder. No law permits the deliberate, premeditated killing of civilians.
October 3, 2025 at 5:04 PM
Don’t believe anyone who tells you that intelligence shows anything “without a doubt,” but even if the intelligence was water-tight, this strike was still murder. No law permits the deliberate, premeditated killing of civilians.
Cities with violent crime rates higher than DC:
Memphis, Tennessee
Houston, Texas
Nashville, Tennessee
Evansville, Indiana
Peoria, Illinois
Toleda, Ohio
Cleveland, Ohio
St Louis, Missouri
Kansas City, Missouri
Springfield, Missouri
Little Rock, Arkansas
for more:
usafacts.org/articles/how...
Memphis, Tennessee
Houston, Texas
Nashville, Tennessee
Evansville, Indiana
Peoria, Illinois
Toleda, Ohio
Cleveland, Ohio
St Louis, Missouri
Kansas City, Missouri
Springfield, Missouri
Little Rock, Arkansas
for more:
usafacts.org/articles/how...
Which cities have the highest and lowest crime rates? | USAFacts
Crime rates stayed constant from 2020 to 2021, but national crime data remains incomplete with about 37% of law enforcement agencies not reporting data last year.
usafacts.org
August 13, 2025 at 2:44 PM
Cities with violent crime rates higher than DC:
Memphis, Tennessee
Houston, Texas
Nashville, Tennessee
Evansville, Indiana
Peoria, Illinois
Toleda, Ohio
Cleveland, Ohio
St Louis, Missouri
Kansas City, Missouri
Springfield, Missouri
Little Rock, Arkansas
for more:
usafacts.org/articles/how...
Memphis, Tennessee
Houston, Texas
Nashville, Tennessee
Evansville, Indiana
Peoria, Illinois
Toleda, Ohio
Cleveland, Ohio
St Louis, Missouri
Kansas City, Missouri
Springfield, Missouri
Little Rock, Arkansas
for more:
usafacts.org/articles/how...
I understand why Trump wants a command and control economy with him at the center. What is confusing to me is why the entire Republican party is so willing to walk so far from a competitive, market-based economy.
August 12, 2025 at 9:35 PM
I understand why Trump wants a command and control economy with him at the center. What is confusing to me is why the entire Republican party is so willing to walk so far from a competitive, market-based economy.
If the concern was really around accuracy why did the Trump administration dismiss the **uncompensated** Technical Advisory Committee and the Data Users Advisory Committee, which gave guidance on statistical methodology and specialized economic expertise?
August 12, 2025 at 9:16 PM
If the concern was really around accuracy why did the Trump administration dismiss the **uncompensated** Technical Advisory Committee and the Data Users Advisory Committee, which gave guidance on statistical methodology and specialized economic expertise?
There were 159,539,000 jobs in July. The fears about accuracy refer to the possibility that it was actually 159,439,000 or 159,639,000. Don't get me wrong, I like accurate numbers more than most people, but still: the data is pretty darn good and suspending the data is corrupt.
August 12, 2025 at 9:15 PM
There were 159,539,000 jobs in July. The fears about accuracy refer to the possibility that it was actually 159,439,000 or 159,639,000. Don't get me wrong, I like accurate numbers more than most people, but still: the data is pretty darn good and suspending the data is corrupt.
One easy way to hide rising unemployment, slowing job growth, and rising prices would be to pause the data release for a few months in the name of "accuracy" and then release it with new definitions a few months later that make it incomparable to the past.
President Trump says he is nominating E.J. Antoni to be the new Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner. Antoni has been a critic of the agency in the past.
@betseystevenson.bsky.social, @pbump.com and Gillian Tett join Katy Tur to share their insights.
www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/wat...
@betseystevenson.bsky.social, @pbump.com and Gillian Tett join Katy Tur to share their insights.
www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/wat...
Why Trump tapping a BLS skeptic to lead the agency is ‘just a very bad idea’
President Trump says he is nominating E.J. Antoni to be the new Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner. Antoni has been a critic of the agency in the past. Former Chief Economist of the U.S. Departme...
www.msnbc.com
August 12, 2025 at 9:15 PM
One easy way to hide rising unemployment, slowing job growth, and rising prices would be to pause the data release for a few months in the name of "accuracy" and then release it with new definitions a few months later that make it incomparable to the past.
The Fed can't be dovish or hawkish right now, they have to be doggish--data doggish that is. nytimes.com/2025/07/02/b...
July 10, 2025 at 10:39 PM
The Fed can't be dovish or hawkish right now, they have to be doggish--data doggish that is. nytimes.com/2025/07/02/b...
Tariffs are not going to mean that we have more goods-producing jobs in the US. What they will do is change the relative price of goods versus services, pushing Americans to buy fewer goods relative to services. If you are worried about American overconsumption of stuff, then hooray! 🧵
July 9, 2025 at 7:36 PM
Tariffs are not going to mean that we have more goods-producing jobs in the US. What they will do is change the relative price of goods versus services, pushing Americans to buy fewer goods relative to services. If you are worried about American overconsumption of stuff, then hooray! 🧵
The United States GDP per capita is 20 times great than it was at the start of the Guilded Age. And yet so many in power remain just as insensitive, greedy, and detached from the realities of poverty and suffering. Imagine getting that much richer and not using any of it on empathy.
July 1, 2025 at 7:28 PM
The United States GDP per capita is 20 times great than it was at the start of the Guilded Age. And yet so many in power remain just as insensitive, greedy, and detached from the realities of poverty and suffering. Imagine getting that much richer and not using any of it on empathy.
This fun, creative contest seriously highlights how hard the entire Planet Money team works to communicate economics in a way that both educates and entertains.
Three Planet Money hosts throw down in our latest edition of Econ Battle Zone. Their challenge – to elucidate the fight over the federal budget, while incorporating their mystery ingredients: rhyme, music, and the genre of romantic comedy.
buff.ly/zjhaaYo
buff.ly/zjhaaYo
npr.org
June 27, 2025 at 3:07 PM
This fun, creative contest seriously highlights how hard the entire Planet Money team works to communicate economics in a way that both educates and entertains.
The public needs to hear this over and over again: work requirements are not about getting Medicaid recipients to work. It’s about increasing the administrative burdens and costs in the system to push both recipients and the program itself to the breaking point.
This is a crucial point about why work requirements are doomed to fail: they place new administrative burdens not just on the public, but also on state governments, while removing resources.
No reason that people normally skeptical about govt capacity should be confident it can pull this off.
No reason that people normally skeptical about govt capacity should be confident it can pull this off.
June 26, 2025 at 2:22 PM
The public needs to hear this over and over again: work requirements are not about getting Medicaid recipients to work. It’s about increasing the administrative burdens and costs in the system to push both recipients and the program itself to the breaking point.
You might be getting bored of tariff talk but the rubber is going to hit the road in the coming months as price increases hit. Walmart tells investors that it's raising prices later this month. And inflation expectations have shot up a shocking amount in the Michigan consumer survey released today.
May 16, 2025 at 8:52 PM
You might be getting bored of tariff talk but the rubber is going to hit the road in the coming months as price increases hit. Walmart tells investors that it's raising prices later this month. And inflation expectations have shot up a shocking amount in the Michigan consumer survey released today.
If they really wanted to incentivize work, they would require married stay-at-home moms to work. The second earner effect is their best chance for a work requirement to influence work at all. There is no first earner impact.
This is just not true. The majority view among researchers at this point is that work requirements do not work. There is a reason they do not cite a single study here.
May 16, 2025 at 2:36 PM
If they really wanted to incentivize work, they would require married stay-at-home moms to work. The second earner effect is their best chance for a work requirement to influence work at all. There is no first earner impact.
Walmart might not raise every price by the amount of the tariff, but they aren't going to let their profitability suffer. Their shareholders demand profit maximization and that means passing along tariffs to the fullest extent possible without losing too many sales.
On @allinwithchris.bsky.social @chrislhayes.bsky.social asked me why tariffs will raise prices if a higher minimum wage doesn't always lead to higher prices.
The answer: People are not things. They respond to a change in their compensation, a sippy cup doesn't.
The answer: People are not things. They respond to a change in their compensation, a sippy cup doesn't.
May 16, 2025 at 2:29 PM
Walmart might not raise every price by the amount of the tariff, but they aren't going to let their profitability suffer. Their shareholders demand profit maximization and that means passing along tariffs to the fullest extent possible without losing too many sales.
On @allinwithchris.bsky.social @chrislhayes.bsky.social asked me why tariffs will raise prices if a higher minimum wage doesn't always lead to higher prices.
The answer: People are not things. They respond to a change in their compensation, a sippy cup doesn't.
The answer: People are not things. They respond to a change in their compensation, a sippy cup doesn't.
May 16, 2025 at 2:27 PM
On @allinwithchris.bsky.social @chrislhayes.bsky.social asked me why tariffs will raise prices if a higher minimum wage doesn't always lead to higher prices.
The answer: People are not things. They respond to a change in their compensation, a sippy cup doesn't.
The answer: People are not things. They respond to a change in their compensation, a sippy cup doesn't.
Reposted by Betsey Stevenson
It's true. President Trump is forcing economists to rewrite their textbooks. #TeachEcon @betseystevenson.bsky.social
May 16, 2025 at 1:28 AM
It's true. President Trump is forcing economists to rewrite their textbooks. #TeachEcon @betseystevenson.bsky.social
And now Walmart is telling us definitely higher prices in June. Just because there aren’t problems in the hard data yet, doesn’t mean that they aren’t forecastably coming.
My concern is that we'll see a weaker employment report in June and July, of course the labor market was strong in April. That report measured the weak after liberation day and despite the shock of Trump's tariffs, employers aren't going to shed workers that quickly.
May 16, 2025 at 12:41 AM
And now Walmart is telling us definitely higher prices in June. Just because there aren’t problems in the hard data yet, doesn’t mean that they aren’t forecastably coming.
My concern is that we'll see a weaker employment report in June and July, of course the labor market was strong in April. That report measured the weak after liberation day and despite the shock of Trump's tariffs, employers aren't going to shed workers that quickly.
May 7, 2025 at 10:07 PM
My concern is that we'll see a weaker employment report in June and July, of course the labor market was strong in April. That report measured the weak after liberation day and despite the shock of Trump's tariffs, employers aren't going to shed workers that quickly.
I didn't post my NBC Fed preview before the press conference. Luckily my preview was exactly what they did and said.
May 7, 2025 at 9:11 PM
I didn't post my NBC Fed preview before the press conference. Luckily my preview was exactly what they did and said.
Reporters seem to think that the only direction for rates to go is down, but Powell shuts that assumption down by saying "once you have a clear direction"
Rates could go either way people!!! It depends on what happens with inflation.
Rates could go either way people!!! It depends on what happens with inflation.
May 7, 2025 at 7:20 PM
Reporters seem to think that the only direction for rates to go is down, but Powell shuts that assumption down by saying "once you have a clear direction"
Rates could go either way people!!! It depends on what happens with inflation.
Rates could go either way people!!! It depends on what happens with inflation.
The Fed can wait because they can't change a decline in supply due to the distruption in imports. They can try to decrease demand for that reduction in supply to help reduce inflationary pressure, but they can't create jobs to make up for those lost due to the reduction in imported goods.
May 7, 2025 at 7:15 PM
The Fed can wait because they can't change a decline in supply due to the distruption in imports. They can try to decrease demand for that reduction in supply to help reduce inflationary pressure, but they can't create jobs to make up for those lost due to the reduction in imported goods.
Powell made a pretty strong case for why the Fed has to ensure that the one time price increase caused by tariffs doesn't cause inflation expectations to become unanchored.
May 7, 2025 at 7:07 PM
Powell made a pretty strong case for why the Fed has to ensure that the one time price increase caused by tariffs doesn't cause inflation expectations to become unanchored.
Nothing Powell said is surprising, this is the sensible decision making of a balanced and reasonable group of monetary policy makers who are walking a tight rope.
May 7, 2025 at 7:07 PM
Nothing Powell said is surprising, this is the sensible decision making of a balanced and reasonable group of monetary policy makers who are walking a tight rope.