Thanks so much for coming! It was a fantastic discussion and really great to see you!!

On several levels, same energy in these two posts:
bsky.app/profile/did:...

It raises the idea that competitive pressure will dictate how much tariffs pass through to prices and, forebodingly, even firms who don't get a cost shock could see other firms' cost shock as cover to raise their own prices.

I'm dealing with medical studies right now and it's incredible how little care they show about biased/selected samples.
Ugh, I know it's cliche for an economist to complain about this in medical stats... I also think the music of my youth was better 😉

To be clear, yields have been rising but so below where they should be given tightness.

Ahhh, that's was a typo. Meant vacancy yields. And they've been riding but so below where they should be given tightness.

And we're not even getting into how one should estimate r* or u* .

Thinking the same thing, I had unfollowed 20 seconds ago. I may have put down some BTC puts before doing so.

I see what you're saying with the relative price effect, but with imperfect competition it doesn't seem neutral to the overall price level. Like, they're essentially creating market power for some firms which should create a one time increase in prices, no?

Hahaha, sorry Carlos! I definitely know it's true. This was my attempt at a reference to past Internet humor. And I actually just mean this is so huge that it's hard to believe it's true.

Why's it matter? We don't have a balanced budget anyway, and they're certainly minuscule relative to other tax sources. If you wanted to pay HH a consumption subsidy to offset the effect, we could do that regardless of the tax revenue.

I know, none of these hills are that great, eh?
But I hear you: so instead of price-elasticity consumer substituion, it's more important to look at production substituion or intermediate input/ capital. I'm good with that.

I mean, the easy example is that in his logic, the oil shocks wouldn't have been inflationary.

Wait, so this is definitely a "me and not my employer" moment: but seems like he's making a comment that's either true or false depending on whether we mean CPI or PCE deflator and (for the later) what's the substituion pattern look like. He needs households to have another perfect substitute.

Haha. True