Words & Numbers

538 Electors. 270 votes. Winner-takes-all! Well, at least for now. Colorado recently became the twelfth state to join an effort to award the presidency to the candidate who wins the most individual votes. But should the popular vote replace the Electoral College? Originally intended as a safeguard for the separation of powers, has this election method failed Americans? Population vs. Geography. Urban vs. Rural. Democrats vs. Republicans; it’s a conversation that usually gets people all lathered up on both sides of the issue. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they inform us about the reasoning behind the Electoral College and how it works. Show Notes: Adidas making sneakers out of waste plastic China stops taking the world’s trash No place for US recyclables Nuclear energy better than renewables Foolishness of the week Police shoot teachers Milgram experiment Topic of the week Electoral College Contract Clause Federalist 68 Join the conversation Words & Numbers Backstage Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Let us know what you think at: [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The dominating online presence of Facebook, Google, and Amazon has often been called monopolistic. Government-enforced monopolies, such as Western Union and Ma Bell, have fallen before, but is Big Tech anything like those old companies? Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has even started a petition calling for the breakup of big tech companies, which may include Apple among others. How would the digital world look if she succeeds? Should politicians get to decide whether Facebook meets the same fate as MySpace or should the consumer? Join us this week as James Harrigan and Antony Davies thwart the misconceptions about monopolies and discuss the fates of tech products like Netscape and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer. Show Notes: Buying your way into college New York City wants to ban “unfair” firings Foolishness of the week Missouri wants to require residents to own AR-15s Topic of the week Elizabeth Warren wants to break up Facebook Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at: [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Live from Scottsdale, Arizona! James Harrigan and Antony Davies contend that the median income in the US puts Americans in the top 1 percent in the world. What does that mean? Only that these people can afford stuff that, roughly a century ago, had been considered luxuries: air conditioning, running hot and cold water, ovens, refrigerators, stainless steel, and even sweet potatoes. The standard of living for even minimum wage earners today has remarkably improved in spite of burdensome regulations, but can this trend continue? Join us this week as our hosts suss out the reasons for the improvements in worldwide wealth and search for the “Goldilocks Zone” of government intervention. Show Notes: Measles outbreak at Midway airport Gap, JC Penny, Foot Locker closures Montgomery Ward Foolishness of the week Sanders: Government can’t go too far Topic of the week Where did Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez get her sweet potatoes? World median income Are you a 1-percenter? Donald Boudreaux on insider trading What would our GDP be if we had less unnecessary regulation? Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week’s guest, David Beito, professor of History at the University of Alabama, discusses the functions, benefits, and undoing of mutual aid societies. These private safety nets, like tontine funds and Masons, once widely provided services such as health and unemployment insurances, hospitals, housing for the elderly, and care for orphans. So what happened? Did beneficiaries dry up these funds? Did scandals, state bans, and the Great Depression lead to the disappearance of benefit societies? Are they still around? Join James Harrigan, Antony Davies, and professor Beito as they answer these questions and more on Words & Numbers. Show Notes: Male-only draft unconstitutional Humanity’s backup plan Foolishness of the week AOC says people shouldn’t reproduce Topic of the week Mutual aid societies Tontine insurance David Beito Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at: [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week, economist and theorist Warren Mosler joins James and Antony to explain the details of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). With 40 years of experience in finance and monetary operations, Mosler is a leading expert on MMT, is a co-founder of AVM—a brokerage, trading, and administrative services firm—and lectures on monetary economics around the world. He covers the important ramifications stemming from the adoption of MMT and how coercive shifts of resources benefit public infrastructure, and responds to criticisms of MMT. With supporters in Washington such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders, MMT is quickly gaining a strong following, and Warren, James, and Antony discuss the important points on this winding theory and more. Show Notes: People killed in armed conflicts People killed by mosquitoes Genetically modified mosquitoes Foolishness of the week TSA smuggling ring Topic of the week Modern Monetary Theory Warren Mosler Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at: [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Discrimination happens every single day. Every human, in some way, makes a judgment about other humans and uses that judgment to discriminate, whether that be who they date, who they do business with, and, yes, who they hire and fire. Most discrimination is fine—necessary, even. But sometimes it crosses a line. Where is that line? How does it affect people’s careers? When is litigation the right option? Antony Davies and James Harrigan with special guest Vince White as they discuss this and more on Words & Numbers. Show Notes: Online dating is changing society Amazon paid no federal taxes Foolishness of the week Amazon took its ball and went home Topic of the week Federal employment discrimination laws Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at: [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Outrage Engine that is social media and op-eds has set its sights on a new target: billionaires. Apparently, being a billionaire is a bad, bad thing. Billionaires should sit down, shut up, and meekly wait until we confiscate their wealth. For certain people of certain political beliefs, this sounds like a great idea. Because, after all, nobody needs that much money. But is it really that simple? Can we really just steal billionaires’ money and nothing bad happens? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they breakdown this and more on Words and Numbers. Quick hits Redditors are kind to a person in need Hawaii tries to ban smoking 1 Hawaii tries to ban smoking 2 Foolishness of the week Green New Deal Resolution Topic of the week Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax plan How an income tax on the rich expanded to be a tax on everyone Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at: [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Fun fact: the profit margin for most businesses is about 8 percent. When you’re talking about categories like restaurants and retail stores, that margin drops to around 2 percent. Yet, some people still seem to believe that all companies are perfectly capable of simply absorbing dramatic increases in their operating costs—namely, labor—with no changes in behavior by these companies. Artificially inflating labor costs, as in the form of minimum wage increases, will not lead to decreased hours, lay-offs, deferred hiring, decreases in benefits, or increased prices for consumers because… reasons. And if you voice disagreement with any of these beliefs, then you must just hate the poor or other ad hominem claims. But who really “hates” the poor based on actual policy outcomes, the #FightFor15 crowd or those who oppose minimum wage hikes? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they dig into this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Quick hits AOC ruffles feathers Lyft offers free rides to shelters Foolishness of the week Seeing racism where it’s not Topic of the week: “You Just Hate the Poor!” and Other Minimum Wage Misunderstandings Analysis of Minimum Wage in Pennsylvania Census data on household incomes Bureau of Labor Statistics data on minimum wage workers A $15 minimum wage hurts workers Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Let us know what you think at [email protected] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Though the United States, as a constitutional republic, is considered to be a “limited government,” it often doesn’t feel that way. Washington keeps churning out law after law regarding what the state may do and what the individual may not. The fault for this is often laid at the feet of the Founders for including the “Necessary and Proper Clause” in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. But is that blame just? Or have politicians through the years simply used it as an excuse to do what they wanted, regardless of what the Constitution says? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they talk about this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Judge convicts volunteers Nancy Pelosi on inequality Foolishness of the week Wealth tax Senators’ oath of office Topic of the week: Diversity Officers and Administrative Bloat in Higher Education How much of government shuts down? Article 1, Section 8 10th Amendment 16th Amendment Wickard v. Filburn Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The word “diversity” has become a sticky one. In the last fifteen years, a genuine “diversity industry” has sprung up, particularly at colleges and universities in the United States. Higher education institutions across the country have entire departments with dozens of full-time, highly-paid staff members dedicated to the concept. But to what effect? And exactly what kinds of “diversity” are we talking about? Special guest (and regular FEE contributing author) Mark J. Perry joins Antony Davies and James Harrigan to drill down into this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Quick hits Oregon first state to require home visits of all families with newborns Oregon looks to impose statewide rent control Article II, Section 3 Nancy Pelosi Foolishness of the week Ginia Bellefante $33 minimum wage City Harvest self-sufficiency calculator Topic of the week: Diversity Officers and Administrative Bloat in Higher Education Mark Perry The impact of diversity officers on diversity University of Michigan spends $11 million on diversity Fraction of 18-24 year olds enrolled in college (by race and gender) Carpe Diem blog Mark Perry on Twitter Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Americans are pretty concerned about violent crime—particularly crimes committed with guns, “assault weapons” most specifically. This concern, statistically speaking, is fairly irrational. You are far more likely to be killed by being beaten or stabbed than you are to be killed by any kind of rifle, “assault” or otherwise. So why are so many people so tied up in knots about it? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they discuss this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Quick hits Corona brewing replaces plastic six-pack rings Illegal immigrants and Social Security numbers The economic case for immigration W&N episode #51: America relies on immigrants Foolishness of the week Being morally right vs being factually correct Criticism vs harassment Topic of the week: Reality and Perception of Crime Pew report on violent crime data FBI crime data Bureau of Justice Statistics crime data Gallup polls on perception of crime trends Defensive uses of guns Firearm homicide and suicide rates by city 2% of US counties account for 50% of US homicides Feinstein introduces assault weapons ban Assault weapons ban of 1994 Article I, Section 8 10th Amendment Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

People like to talk about the “good old days” where everything used to be so much better than it is today. Everybody feels nostalgic on occasion, and it’s perfectly normal to misremember the past, but were the good old days really all that great? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they compare then and now on the 100th episode of Words and Numbers. Quick Hits:Cat parasiteElizabeth Warren Foolishness of the Week: NY Times crossword Topic of the week: Comparing Life Today to Life 100 Years Ago See the accompanying chart for data and data sources. Join the Conversation:Antony Davies on TwitterJames R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Happy 2019, everyone! On our first episode of Words & Numbers in the new year, professor James Stacey Taylor joins Antony and James this week to discuss the ethical implications of creating markets for human organs. According to Prof. Taylor, nearly 18 people a day die from a shortage of kidney donors. Economists have argued for decades that these kinds of markets could save lives by creating better incentives for people to donate their organs to people in dire need, but critics say that it would encourage poorer people to put their health at risk for money. Who's right? Quick Hits: University of Missouri says tall men asking short women on dates is policy violationUniversity of Missouri and Title IX (court transcript)No one wants to buy Sears Foolishness of the Week: Union dues eat worker’s entire paycheck Topic of the week: Organ Markets James Stacey Taylor People in need of kidney donors Join the Conversation: Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on TwitterAntony Davies on Minds.comJames R. Harrigan on Minds.comWords & Numbers Backstage www.fee.org/shows Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Within less than a decade of ratification of the Bill of Rights, President John Adams signed the Sedition Act, which blatantly violated the First Amendment’s protections of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Since that time, the Supreme Court has repeatedly taken a firm stand in defense of the First Amendment against government encroachment. Yet, within the past couple of years, we’ve heard Congressional Democrats and now a Republican President call for restrictions of both the press and speech that is critical of the government. The freedom to criticize government is the last tool available to peaceful people who seek change. A government that prohibits critical speech, leaves its people with no option but to take up arms. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they discuss this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Corona brewing replaces plastic six-pack rings Iowa high schools require gun safety courses Foolishness of the week TSA switching to floppy eared dogs Topic of the week: The Alien and Sedition Acts Congressional party results The enemy of the people Sedition Act 1 Sedition Act 2 Sedition Act 3 Sedition Act 4 Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Americans have the distinct reputation of being incredibly selfish. All things considered, it’s not exactly unearned. That said, every year, Americans also quietly give a rather astonishingly large amount of money to charities, particularly during the holiday season. Over $400 billion, in fact, 75 percent of which was for those less fortunate. And that’s simply the cash and goods. Beyond that, 60 million Americans each donated an average of 120 hours of their time to charities. This is, incidentally, more than the federal government spends on all of its welfare programs combined. What does this actually mean? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they discuss this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Penguins fan gets a kidney South African politician calls on people to kill whites Foolishness of the Week Nurse denied life insurance Topic of the Week: Giving Giving Tuesday Statistics of US generosity Arthur Brooks: Who Really Cares? Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Money is one of those things that is so ubiquitous, so completely taken for granted, that we rarely stop to think about what it actually is. The colored bits of paper that we call dollars don’t have any particular worth on their own, yet we use them as though they do. John Locke, in 1689 when he wrote his Second Treatise of Government, touched on it, hinting at the three qualities money possesses. But what are those three things? What happens when one or more of those three attributes is abandoned? And how does the government fit into all of this? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they examine this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Payless Shoes’s social experiment Japan 1 Japan 2 Foolishness of the Week Instructions for making toast Topic of the Week: What is money? Money Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We hear a lot about jobs, these days. We have monthly government jobs reports. Our politicians talk about job creation. Some people fear others will “take our jobs!” But what is a job? Is it the prize of some sort of economic vending machine where you have a few inputs, press a few buttons, and out comes a shiny new job? Is it an empty space at a company that needs to be filled? Or is it something else altogether? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they talk about this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Fed signals that interest rates won’t rise much further North Carolina voter fraud Foolishness of the Week Oakland University Hockey pucks Michigan state gun law Topic of the Week: Jobs Employment statistics Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It’s no secret that social media is in a bit of a shambles. The big players like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are purging accounts, censoring content, and mining data. Many users are very unhappy with them. But what alternatives do we have? Maybe more than you think. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies along with Minds.com founder Bill Ottman as they talk about social media alternatives and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Small business Saturday Dimming the sun We’re all related Foolishness of the Week Florida gun buyback Topic of the Week: An Alternative to Facebook Minds.com Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Antony Davies on Minds.com James R. Harrigan on Minds.com Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There was once a time when politicians were civil to each other. Neighbors and friends who disagreed politically remained neighborly and friendly to each other. Opponents were graceful in defeat and generous in victory. But somewhere along the line, we lost that. These days, it seems that all there is is vitriol and hate. That is what happens when an electorate focuses solely on the outcomes that they want instead of the principles they believe in. What are these principles and why do they matter? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they discuss this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Eye drops to correct vision Foolishness of the Week Rejecting the measles vaccine Topic of the Week: Principles Why libertarians start at first principles The roots of political polarization Ford-Carter presidential debate Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the wake of the midterm elections, there’s been a lot of talk about democracy and how it works. Many—largely on the left—are confused and angry because, despite garnering the higher number of votes, Democrats failed to take a majority of seats in the Senate. This demonstrates a basic misunderstanding about American government, the electoral process, and how they work. Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they break it down for us on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Pittsburgh shooting Smoking rate hits a low Foolishness of the Week: Man claims he is age-fluid Topic of the Week: Democracy: The View blames Senate win on gerrymandering The problem of factions Winning the popular vote but losing the election Democrats got more votes but Republicans won Arrow Impossibility Theorem Join the Conversation: Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

“It’s the most important election in history.” That’s the rhetoric you see plastered across the news and social media. Perhaps, people view this election as such because they believe it to be the government’s job to provide things for them. This is apparent on both sides of the aisle. Democrats want free health care and education. Republicans want a border wall and tariffs on imported goods. But, is it the government’s job to provide services that Democrats want? Is the government a tool of protection for American businesses that Republicans view it as? Join hosts Antony Davies and James R. Harrigan as they discuss the proper role of government and more on this episode of Words & Numbers. Show Notes: Foolishness of the week. CBO reports $782 billion deficit for fiscal year ending 9/30/2018 Why does the deficit not match the increase in the debt? Topic of the week: The midterm elections. Is this the most important election ever? This isn’t the most important election ever! Join the conversation. Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Economists use the term “creative destruction” a fair amount, but what does it actually mean? It generally refers to a company going out of business, or sometimes whole sectors of the economy vanishing as disruptive technologies and strategies come into play. It is very easy to see the “destruction” part of creative destruction. We see the empty storefronts and people out of work because the businesses they worked for couldn’t afford to pay them anymore. We point fingers and lament the loss of these former favorites. So where does the “creation” part of all this come in? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they take a close look at this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Scientists develop a strain of saline-tolerant rice Discrimination at Harvard Foolishness of the Week New York socialist wonders why people are moving to Florida Topic of the Week: Creative destruction Good and Bad Destruction: Buggy Whips and Broken Windows Ten jobs that no longer exist Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Canada recently legalized the possession and use of marijuana and proposed legislation to pardon those previously convicted of such “crimes.” So, it’s as good a time as any to take a look at how such things are handled in the United States. While, yes, in the majority of states, there is some provision for certain kinds of legal use of marijuana—including full legalization in a few—the fact remains that the plant itself remains completely illegal at the federal level. In aggregate, across the United States, the clearance rate—that is, of criminal cases being considered solved—for violent crimes is less than 50 percent and less than 20 percent for property crimes. In 2016, there were more arrests for marijuana possession across the country than for all violent crimes combined. And that’s just one single aspect of the American criminal “justice” system. Clark Neily of the Cato Institute, a noted criminal justice scholar, joins James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they take an unvarnished look at the state of criminal justice in the United States on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Gloves let users feel virtual objects Trump orders cabinet to cut spending 5% Foolishness of the Week Nebraska’s honesty in advertising Topic of the Week: Clark Neily on the imbalance of power in our judicial system Clark Neily Canada legalizes marijuana and moves to pardon possession Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Imagine, if you will, that the United States federal government somehow received all of the money it normally would for the entire year on January 1st. The day it would have spent it all and started deficit spending (that is, spending money it simply doesn’t have) could be dubbed “Deficit Day.” This year, 2018, that day falls on October 19th. From this day until the end of the year, the US Federal Government is spending money it doesn’t have to the tune of about $11 billion per day. So what does that mean for the government? What does that mean for the people? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they dive into this and more on this week’s episode of Words & Numbers Show Notes: Trump administration stifles free speech Foolishness of the Week Government regulating pizza toppings Topic of the Week: Deficit Day Congressional Budget Office projections Federal receipts and outlays over time Interest rate on the federal debt Student loan debt statistics Flemming v. Nestor (1960): You do not have an earned right to Social Security benefits Helvering v. Davis (1937): Social Security taxes are part of the general revenue Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

When it comes to free trade agreements, ideally they should be very short. Four words would suffice: “Trade will be free.” But politicians being what they are, what we (that is to say, Mexico, Canada, and the United States) actually have to replace NAFTA is a 1,800-page tome called the USMCA. Hundreds of pages of caveats doesn’t sound very much like free trade. That said, this trade agreement, like all trade agreements, rests on the the myth that it is countries that trade with each other. Countries are aggregates; they can’t actually do anything. It is individuals who trade with each other. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they weigh in on trade agreements and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Authorities may shoot down private drones Amazon reacts to the $15 wage Foolishness of the Week Jazz hands Topic of the Week: Trade Trade data Infographic of trade data Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode, we’re answering listener questions. What’s going on with this scary, dystopian Chinese social credit system? What government agency would you get rid of? What happens when religious leaders (allowed to freely exercise their faith as enshrined in the First Amendment) don’t allow their followers the right of free speech (also enshrined in the First Amendment)? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they answer these listener questions and more on this week’s second Listener Special episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Foolishness of the Week Texas legislator wants to require political speech Pennsylvania legislator wants to ban political speech Topic of the week: Listener questions Modern monetary theory More on modern monetary theory Water rights Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Worries about mob rule have been around longer than our Constitution. Indeed, James Madison wrote about the problems of “factions” in what we’ve come to call the Federalist Papers. We like to think that our three branches of government with their checks and balances are impervious to the evils of faction. But today we may be living Madison’s nightmare. Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they discuss this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes Controlling aging Jeff Bezos donates $2 billion What it feels like to be Jeff Bezos Foolishness of the Week Outlawing sitting and lying down Topic of the Week: Political factions and mob rule Madison’s warning about mob rule Federalist 10 Federal debt as a fraction of GDP (1790 to 2050) Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Imposing “price gouging” bans after a natural disaster doesn’t actually help anybody. On paper, it looks ideal. Shoppers who don’t have funds and didn’t prepare for the storm can still afford to buy everything, even if it’s completely last-minute and a bit of a race to the finish line. But the reality is that price-gouging laws don’t make things better, nor do they make things fairer. In the face of a category 1 hurricane like Florence, they just create more scarcity and destroy incentives to keep the supply chain moving. In the end, it doesn’t matter how low the price of your wares are if you can’t actually buy it. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they delve into this topic and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Dominos’ CEO earned $8.6 million in 2016 Dominos will fix the roads Foolishness of the week Get a Dominos tattoo and get free pizza Topic of the week: Price gouging Cafeteria economists Uber and surge pricing Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Conservative and liberal: probably the two most commonly used words to describe a person’s political affiliations. And, of course, we all know that Republicans are all conservatives and Democrats are all liberals, and this is the way it’s always been. Right? Well, no, not really. The way that we’ve come to understand these terms currently has drifted pretty far afield of the way these words have been used previously. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they get super-semantic about political labels and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: California bill requiring women on boards of directors California law easing restrictions on legally changing one’s gender Elon Musk smokes pot on the air Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The word “capitalism” has become incredibly loaded over the years. And since the term was actually popularized by Karl Marx to be the foil for his own ideology, that’s fairly understandable. It brings to mind all of the very worst aspects embodied by the elite, greedy, rent-seeking Gordon Geckos of the world, hoarding their capital resources like dragons on a pile of gold and profiting from the hard work of laborers while doing nothing productive themselves. This characterization, while incredibly common, is simply incorrect. Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they discuss the actual meaning of capitalism and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: MIT study of commute times Marchetti’s constant Commute times in the 50 states California requires companies to place women on boards Foolishness of the Week: Laura Ingraham wants Facebook to be a public utility Topic of the Week: Capitalism: Capitalism Prices as signals Join the Conversation: Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We’re experiencing the rise of a new kind of socialist. The original definition of socialism—state ownership of the means of production—is beginning to fall by the wayside. What self-proclaimed socialists are asking for now is for the state to control the means of production. While this might seem like a pedantic distinction, it’s an important one. But the rebranding of socialism by democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez still fails to take into account the most important aspect of sound economics: human behavior. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they drill down into the pitfalls of socialism and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Half the world will be middle-class by 2020 World poverty rates Madsen Pirie High schooler faces prison for shooting zombies Foolishness of the week NASCAR driver loses sponsorship for father’s remarks Topic of the week: Socialism Socialism Theory of pervasive shortages under socialism Join the conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Everybody vaguely familiar with basic economic concepts knows that there’s no such thing as a free lunch. It’s a great phrase and speaks to the principles of both opportunity cost and scarcity. That said, a “free lunch” refers to more than your afternoon repast. Everything costs something. And if you end up paying zero dollars for it, that only means it was paid for by someone else. This holds true for college tuition. It may cost a student zero dollars, and that student will certainly benefit from not having to pay for higher education herself, but what’s really been done is shifting the cost from the student—who is actually using the service—to the taxpayers—who certainly aren’t. So while there’s certainly a big problem with student debt in America, the solution isn’t “free” tuition. Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they get deep in the weeds about college tuition and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: 11 year old hacker changes election results California law would prohibit restaurants from listing soft drinks on menus Foolishness of the Week Cops taser 87 year-old woman Topic of the Week: Public policy and financing higher education Tuition discounting Financing college through equity instead of debt Student loan data Join the Conversation Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

James and Ant have a lot of experience with both high school and college students. Most of the time, they’re extremely impressed with the high school students that they encounter. But something seems to be happening in the summer between high school graduation and beginning their first semester of college. Something… not ideal. And to a point, it’s perfectly natural. Young people are interested in exploring their newfound freedom, and that includes the amount of attention that they pay to their studies. Because of this, a great many otherwise intelligent students find themselves struggling with college. So, if you do decide to attend a college or university, how can you keep this from happening? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as the explore this and more on this week’s episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Number of bachelor’s degrees conferred by field of study Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Join the conversation at Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

As the back-to-school season gets into full swing, hundreds of thousands of young people are heading back to class at their chosen college or university. On average, the simple dollar cost of tuition and fees for a four-year degree is about a quarter of a million dollars. A large majority of students will have to take on some kind student loan debt to cover these costs. But we've been told our whole lives that in order to have a good job and successful career, a college degree is both necessary and an automatic golden ticket, so it has to be worth it. Right? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they drill down into the value of a college degree and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Tuition and fees at 4-year institutions over time 30 million jobs in the US pay $55,000 per year and don’t require a college degree High paying jobs sit empty while students go to college Median income by education, 2017 (table 5) Median income by education, 1997 (table 4) Unemployment rate by education, 2017 Unemployment rate by education, 1997 Fraction of 15-24 year olds enrolled in college over time Average pay by college major FEE high school seminars Social Media: Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Join the conversation at Words & Numbers Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

People tend to have a strange blind spot when it comes to government. We—or a lot of us, at least—tend to assume the best of intentions from our government. Our fellow civilians garner suspicion, but our elected officials are somehow magically benevolent and altruistic. When governments misbehave and act violently, we tend to think about these actions in terms of warfare. And yes, in the 20th century alone, wars have killed around 106 million people. That's a lot and not to be discounted. But in the same timeframe, governments have killed at least that many—and probably more like twice that number—within the confines of their own borders. We forget that a government is a monopoly on the use of force, and every time we ask our government to do something, even something as innocuous as putting up parking meters, what we're really asking them to do is to bring their force—their violence—to bear on our behalf. It's a sobering thought. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they dive deep into this subject and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Venezuela’s 1,000,000% inflation Seattle’s street cars too big for their tracks Foolishness of the week Bank of America loses customers’ safe deposit boxes Topic of the week: How many people do governments kill? Soviet Union kills 20 million of its own citizens China kills 65 million of its own citizens Cambodia kills 1.5 to 3 million of its own citizens 20th century democide Less than 500,000 people murdered worldwide annually by non-governments US incarceration rates 1960-2012 Incarceration rates across countries 7 million Americans either in prison, on probation or parole How We Thrive documentary Antony Davies on Twitter James R. Harrigan on Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Gallup recently asked 1,000 people about what the most important issue we’re dealing with is in the United States. You might think that the majority answered drugs and gun control, but you’d be wrong. Instead, the survey found that drugs only received 1% of votes as being the biggest issue, and a whopping 2% for gun rights, with those numbers only going as high as 4% since January. The only time those numbers changed was in March, when the media massively promoted the gun rights debate, culminating into the already-forgotten March for Our Lives movement. As much as we criticize the media, these numbers show how much they manufacture sensationalism. Join us this week as we discuss open-ended polls and the influence of media on people’s issues with James Harrigan and Antony Davies. Show Notes: Diamonds worth $31 septillion Jeff Bezos worth $150 billion Doctors give patients seconds Foolishness of the week Congressman calls for ban on cryptocurrency Topic of the week: What’s the largest problem facing the country? Gallup poll School shootings not as common as the media portrays Gun violence waning Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There are many people in this world who like to make the argument, "Correlation is not causation." And this oft-used expression is true. Correlation is not, in fact, causation. Just because two things tend to happen at about the same time does not necessarily mean that they have anything to do with each other at all. That said, lack of correlation does mean lack of causation. So what does that mean for economic freedom and "good" social outcomes? Join James and Antony as they unpack what economic freedom indices indicate and more on this episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Employment rate almost full recovered from 2008 crash TSA gets immunity Foolishness of the week Starbucks’ straws Topic of the week: Economic Freedom Equality, Liberty, and Prosperity Fraser: Economic Freedom of the World Fraser: Economic Freedom of North America Heritage/WSJ: Index of Economic Freedom Cato: Freedom in the 50 States Contact us Antony on Twitter James on Twitter Words & Numbers - Backstage Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Why are we debating the Supreme Court nominees as much as we are? Unbelievably, written requirements of the Supreme Court are non-existent. Where the Constitution lists age and experience requirements for both presidential and congressional candidates, only a tiny paragraph describes what the third branch of government should look like. All of those standards and regulations you think are law? None have been put in writing anywhere. In fact, judicial review, one of the most important parts of a Supreme Court Justice’s job, only started in 1803, established following the ruling of Marbury v. Madison. Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan this week as they discuss the surprising standards set for Supreme Court Justice candidates. Show Notes: North Korea executes a General for giving food to soldiers’ families The United States fines people for giving food to the poor Black men are succeeding in America Foolishness of the week Americans ask the FAA to regulate seat size Topic of the week: The Supreme Court Sotomayor on the idea of a living constitution Scalia on the idea of a living constitution Congressional job approval Agreement rates among Supreme Court Justices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What do you know about the political party you disagree with the most? Who do you think makes the group up? Is it a bunch of “libtard snowflakes” who are all union-backed? Or is it a bunch of offensive alt-right wackos with too much money to know what to do with it? Either way, those perceptions are both completely off-base—caricatural, even—and dangerous. A study, titled, “The Parties in our Heads: Misperceptions About Party Composition and Their Consequences” discusses exactly how Democrats and Republicans perceive both themselves and each other, and shows exactly how inaccurate those perceptions are. From exaggerated numbers of union-affiliated democrats to impossible statistics of Republicans who make more than $250,000 per year, join us as we discuss the dangers of political misrepresentation and more in this week’s episode of Words and Numbers with James Harrigan and Antony Davies. Show Notes: Harley Davidson moving overseas Largest U.S. nail manufacturer on brink of extinction FDA approves marijuana-based drug Foolishness of the week US is the 10th most dangerous country for women John Cleese and the BBC Laura Ingalls Wilder Topic of the week Each party is wrong about the other The Parties in Our Heads: Misperceptions about Party Composition and Their Consequences Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The criminal justice system presents a lot of issues, the least of which is discrimination. . . despite what the public may think. Over decades, prosecutors have slowly taken power and responsibility away from the jury and into their own hands, destroying the premise of “presumed innocent until proven guilty.” Statutory immunity, legal discretion and the opaqueness of the criminal justice system are all much bigger problems than discrimination, which is, in fact, a much less negative term than we generally think. But why are these things such big issues? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan this week with special guest, criminal justice attorney Catherine Barnard as they explore some of the biggest issues with today’s justice system. Show Notes: Cure for diabetes Republican proposal to balance the budget by cutting entitlements Proposed 2019 Federal budget Foolishness of the week Sarah Huckabee Sanders kicked out of restaurant Topic of the week: Equality under the law Catherine Bernard James and Ant on Twitter @JamesRHarrigan @AntonyDavies Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Which would you rather be, a member of the working class in America today or an 18th-century French monarch? The answer to that is almost certainly the former. A lot has changed in the last 200 years. Heck, a lot has changed in the last 20 years, for that matter, and with a few notable exceptions, those changes have been for the better. In the year 1800, 95 percent of the world lived in extreme poverty. Today, it's less than 10 percent, despite there being more than 6 billion more people living today. We carry in our pockets a supercomputer that allows us access to the sum total of human knowledge that we use to look at cat GIFs. Life is pretty amazing. So why do so few people believe that's the case? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they talk about this and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Iraq is getting safer Empty seats at the world cup Foolishness of the week Netflix’ 5-second rule Topic of the week: The world is getting better every day Louis CK, everything is amazing and nobody is happy Cafe Hayek: Most Americans are richer than Rockefeller Pew survey on perceptions of gun violence Media and cognitive biases Living conditions in the United States U.S. Firearm deaths 2012-2016 U.S. Firearm deaths 1975-1994 (chart 5.1) U.S. non-fatal firearm violence 1993-2011 Military and civilian deaths due to armed conflicts since 1945 Child labor rates 1950-present Global income inequality 1800-present Gender inequality 1995-2015 World poverty 1820-2015 Animation showing longevity and income by country 1800-present Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's a well-established fact that Social Security and Medicare are in serious trouble and have been for a while. The newest projections released last week have Social Security being insolvent in the year 2034 and Medicare in 2026. A fair amount of this trouble can be laid at the feet of the federal government and its seemingly insatiable habit of spending money it doesn't have. It's gotten to the point that there isn't really anywhere else in the world that has the amount of money the US government needs to borrow. It seemed so easy to just take that money from the Social Security and Medicare trusts at the time, but with federal spending now higher than it's ever been (regardless of whether you adjust for inflation or simply count it as a percentage of GDP), it seems very unlikely that that money will—or even can—ever be paid back. So, what's a government to do? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they talk about this and more on this week's special live-from-FEEcon episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes Anthony Bourdain Charles Krauthammer Country Time comes to the rescue of children’s lemonade stands Lemonade stand shut down 1 Lemonade stand shut down 2 Lemonade stand shut down 3 Foolishness of the week Bernie Sanders believes socialist ideas are winning Topic of the week: Federal bankruptcy Historical CBO projections Debt myths debunked Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The jobs report for the month of May has recently been released, and Republicans—particularly President Trump—have been very busy congratulating themselves about the rosy unemployment rate. In fairness, unemployment is currently the lowest it's been since the turn of the millennium, which is nothing to turn one's nose up at. But there's more to a healthy economy than a low unemployment rate. So, what does the May jobs report actually say? And what do those numbers really imply? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they unpack the May jobs report and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Dog buys food with leaves Bare-knuckle boxing Foolishness of the week Bernie Sanders says Disney needs a moral defense Topic of the week Unemployment numbers On twitter @AntonyDavies @JamesRHarrigan Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

If there's something that progressives agree on, it's that inequality exists and that it's a problem. But what do we mean when we say "inequality"? Is it that some people have more "stuff" (money, goods, access to services) than others? Is it that some people are more skilled, more talented, better looking, or just plain luckier than others? In a relatively free society with fairly consistent equality of opportunity, the result is inevitably going to be inequality of outcome. And this is not necessarily a bad thing. Why is a certain amount of inequality a good thing? Should we care about numerical inequality indicators such as the Gini index? Should we take legislative action to "level the playing field"? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they talk about this and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Seattle’s tax on jobs France bans throwing away unsold clothing France bans throwing away unsold food Hillary Clinton wants to be Facebook’s CEO Federalist 10 Equality in the consumption of goods and services (1) Equality in the consumption of goods and services (2) Inequality rising over time Taxes and transfers reduce income inequality by 25% All the quintiles are getting richer Much of the inequality we observe is due to differences in ages (Table H-10) Income mobility across generations Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week on Words and Numbers, it's all about you, the listener. Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they answer questions from listeners posed in the Words and Numbers: Backstage Facebook group. Don't miss out on the next opportunity to have your questions answered on air! Join the Words and Numbers: Backstage Facebook group, where the conversation continues. Show Notes: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Datasets Do we have the right to silence speech? Is there a case for progressive taxes? What is causing the youth unemployment? Why does government only grow? How can markets encourage us to use scarce resources judiciously Will prostitution ever be legal? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Adam Smith is widely regarded as the "father of economics," but what isn't as widely known is that he never considered himself an economist. He thought of himself as a philosopher. And, indeed, in the tradition of the Scottish Enlightenment, he was one. In the Scottish Enlightenment, study was largely divided into two categories: natural science and moral science. Natural science largely explains itself, but moral science was an attempt to ground ethics and morality in as much scientific reality and fact-based reasoning as possible, and it's from that branch of study that the subject of economics bloomed. If you want to make moral statements, if your heart is in the right place, then you need to have your facts straight. And while, over time, we've seen a more and more tightly defined division of labor and specialization, particularly in academia, perhaps it's time to get back to a more holistic form of study when it comes to economics and ethics. Join Antony Davies, James Harrigan, and special guest David Schmidtz as they discuss this and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Manipulating matter at the atomic level People are fleeing California’s taxes Jim Bakker David Schmidtz Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We are individuals, but we're also members of society. Economics generally deals with individual action whereas politics deals with the behavior of society as a whole. Economics, as a discipline, seeks to understand, explain, and sometimes predict human behavior. Politics, on the other hand, seeks to control the behavior of society at large. When we talk about freedom, what kind of freedom are we talking about? Is it the ability to decide which goods and services we purchase and from whom without restriction? Is it being able to choose who represents our interests in government and which laws they create? And which is more important? Or is either of them? Join James Harrigan and Antony Davies as they take a deep dive into what, exactly, economics and politics actually are and what freedom in those spheres might actually mean on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes: Brain implant improves memory Oliver North named president of the NRA Foolishness of the Week The Pope doesn’t understand economics The Pope and Libertarianism Topic of the week: What is economics? Economics informs the decision to marry How people choose when they know that they don’t know what to pick Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Recently, Senator Chuck Schumer introduced a bill that would decriminalize marijuana on the federal level. He stated that the legality of marijuana should be a matter left up to individual states. This ringing endorsement of federalism might carry a little more weight if Senator Schumer hadn't spent a large part of his political career trying to micromanage Americans' behavior at the national level. Hillary Clinton is widely considered to be a staunch supporter of the LGBT community; however, she was publicly opposed to marriage equality until 2013. These are just two of the innumerable examples of politicians changing their stances on policy issues in the face of evolving public opinion. This is not a new phenomenon or exclusive to a single political party. Not only is it common for politicians to modify their positions of political principles to match changing public opinion, you'd be hard-pressed to find one who doesn't. We are dealing with political followership, not political leadership. So, what does that get us? Antony Davies and James Harrigan talk about this and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Show Notes Tariff dodgers-01 Tariff dodgers-02 PSU’s outing club may not go outside Foolishness of the week: Nutrition labeling for pizza Topic of the week: Political leaders and followers Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In today's strange climate of political correctness, free speech exists in a weird place. Safe spaces, First Amendment zones, the attitude of victimization, and accusations that "your fav is problematic" abound. And yet, important things, challenging things, dangerous things still need to be said and are being said. One critical "loophole" for dodging the would-be censors to get these ideas out into the world is comedy. Comedians live in a peculiar kind of in-between that allows for a certain audacity in messaging that doesn't quite exist for, say, politicians or activists. Special guest Lou Perez from We The Internet joins James and Antony to talk about messaging, humor, and more on this week's episode of Words and Numbers. Quick hits More registered voters than citizens https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/election-fraud-registered-voters-outnumber-eligible-voters-462-counties/ UK bans straws https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-chogm-plastic/britain-to-ban-sale-of-plastic-straws-in-bid-to-fight-waste-idUSKBN1HP338 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/16/scientists-accidentally-create-mutant-enzyme-that-eats-plastic-bottles Toastabag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2KxiFL8XsA Foolishness of the week New Yorker complains about Chik-fil-A https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-gastronomy/chick-fil-as-creepy-infiltration-of-new-york-city Topic of the week: Free Speech with Lou Perez http://www.louperez.net/ https://twitter.com/LOUontheSUBWAY Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Every year, the American people spend about $30 billion on accountants and software to file their taxes. That's on top of taxes themselves. Approximately 26 percent of the average American's income is collected, in some form or another, in taxes. This includes all forms of taxation, such as state and local taxes, as well as federal. If we look at just federal taxation, that still comes to a very respectable 16 to 18 percent (on average) of GDP. But how does that all break down when it comes to federal taxation? Are the poor really getting bent over the taxation barrel every April? Are the rich not really paying their "fair share"? And how did we even get to this point? Join Antony Davies and James Harrigan as they discuss this and more on this week's Tax Day edition of Words and Numbers. The top 1% earn 20% of all income but pay almost 40% of all federal taxes. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/51361-householdincomefedtaxesonecol.pdf Country comparison of tax revenue from all levels of government per GDP US = 26%; Denmark = 45%; Ireland = 22%. This ignores borrowing. If government taxed enough to balance budget, US would be at 31%, putting it on par with Canada. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-do-us-taxes-compare-internationally Overview of federal taxes https://files.taxfoundation.org/20170201091804/TaxFoundation-FF540.pdf 60% of US households receive more money back from the federal government than they pay https://taxfoundation.org/60-percent-households-now-receive-more-transfer-income-they-pay-taxes/ How taxes and transfers trap the poor https://mises.org/library/dead-zone-implicit-marginal-tax-rate The income tax was originally a tax on the rich. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-10-05/income-tax-history-is-a-warning-about-our-future-under-clintons-estate-tax Number of pages in the Standard Federal Tax Reporter https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-words-are-tax-code/ Fun tax facts https://www.factretriever.com/taxes-facts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices