Economics Happy Hour Podcast

Matt & Jadrian

Economics Happy Hour is a podcast where two economics educators talk through current events, teaching, and research over a drink. Conversations are unscripted and focused on how economists actually think about the world and the classroom. www.econhappyhour.com

  1. 2H AGO

    The Economy by Decade: The 2020s

    The 2020s have already delivered one of the strangest economic decades in modern history. We unpack how the pandemic reshaped work, inflation, housing, consumer behavior, and even the way economists think about recessions. We debate whether the pandemic or AI will ultimately define the decade, revisit the policy decisions that still shape the economy today, and talk through why everything from used cars to mortgage rates suddenly felt upside down. Along the way, we explore why the economy has seemed surprisingly resilient despite nonstop shocks, disruptions, and uncertainty. In this episode, we talk about: * Whether the pandemic or AI will be remembered as the defining economic event of the 2020s * Inflation, stimulus policies, tariffs, and the strange post-pandemic economy * How housing, work-from-home, and consumer habits permanently changed * Why the 2020s economy has felt unusually weird and unpredictable If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy This Week’s Drinks 🍻 Jadrian cracked open a Hardywood Pils, leftover from an end-of-semester cookout with his TAs. He almost grabbed the PBR x Grillo’s Pickle Beer, but decided to save that adventure for a future episode. Matt went with a Hammerhead IPA from Big Oyster Brewery, a West Coast-style IPA brewed with six hop varietals for an intense citrus and grapefruit character with notes of pine. Name That Stat 📊 We originally planned to talk about the economics of higher education, so Jadrian brought in a stat on the number of graduate programs in the U.S., which has grown by roughly 69% since the early 2000s. But once we decided to launch our “economics by the decade” series, Matt pivoted to one of the defining economic indicators of the 2020s: the inflation rate that peaked in June 2022 at its highest level since the early 1980s. Show Notes We’re kicking off a new series that looks back at the biggest economic stories of every decade, starting with the 2020s and working backward through history. We’re taking a shot at making sense of the economic chaos of the 2020s. Honestly, “chaos” might undersell it a little. It should be no surprise that we start with the pandemic, which instantly disrupted employment, supply chains, education, consumer habits, and everyday life. But twenty years from now, will we remember the pandemic as the biggest story, or will the introduction of generative AI ultimately eclipse it? Perhaps the most common theme of the episode is how weird the economy has behaved this decade. Historically, recessions, unemployment, inflation, and growth tended to move together in more predictable ways. The 2020s constantly break those expectations. One easy example: the NBER determined that the pandemic recession officially lasted only two months, even though the traditional shorthand definition of a recession involves two quarters, or six months, of decline. Of course, the disruption lasted much longer than two months, which allowed educators the chance to explain the ways economists define and measure different indicators. The 2020s also included large spikes in inflation without the kind of sustained unemployment that economists might typically expect. The decade saw regional bank collapses, sweeping tariffs, and repeated uncertainty, but markets often just kept chugging along. Even the stock market wasn’t immune to the weirdness. There were also some pretty big policy decisions this decade, not all of which have been consensus picks. A lot of people would argue that the earliest rounds of pandemic relief were necessary to prevent economic collapse, while later stimulus packages may have contributed to inflation once the economy had already stabilized. But did policymakers really know the economy was in a good place at the time? Maybe not. There was no serious economic justification for imposing widespread tariffs on our trading partners, notwithstanding that tariffs are almost universally disliked by economists. One takeaway for listeners is that nearly every major decision of the decade came with enormous trade-offs and very little certainty. Not to be left out, but housing and consumer trends were also contenders for the defining stories of the decade. Ultra-low pandemic-era mortgage rates locked many homeowners into staying put, while newer buyers suddenly faced dramatically higher borrowing costs. Meanwhile, consumers saw a massive uptick in online ordering, curbside pickup, delivery apps, and mobile-first shopping experiences that never really disappeared afterward. In many ways, the 2020s feel like a decade where the economy keeps absorbing shocks that would have seemed unimaginable only a few years earlier. And somehow, despite all of it, things keep moving forward, even if nobody is entirely sure what “normal” is supposed to look like anymore. So tell us: what did we miss? What do you think will define the 2020s economically? And which decade are you most excited for us to cover next? Leave a comment and let us know how wrong we were. Pop Culture Corner 🍿 While it’s not a traditional pop culture contribution, Jadrian shared a book recommendation: Financial Diaries by Jonathan Morduch and Rachel Schneider. The authors draw on the lives of 235 low- and middle-income families over the course of a year, using those diaries to challenge popular assumptions about how Americans earn, spend, borrow, and save. The book highlights how income volatility, not just low income, creates financial stress for many working families. Matt has recently been working on expanding his pop culture reach across new disciplines, including political science and accounting. His contribution this week included a classic scene from Office Space, where “The Bobs” are brought in to audit Initech. The second clip comes from a project on helping accounting professors teach their courses. In the following scene from The Office, Michael Scott puts discount tickets randomly into boxes. The accounting question: how does that liability factor onto the balance sheet? Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    54 min
  2. MAY 8

    Why Teens Stopped Working

    Teenagers today are far less likely to work than previous generations. This episode explores the long decline in teen labor force participation and tries to identify some possible causes. The conversation also turns personal, with reflections on the skills we gained from working early. Along the way, we debate whether teenage jobs still provide important lessons in responsibility, communication, and independence. In this episode, we talk about: * Why teen labor force participation has fallen so dramatically since the 1970s * Whether modern teenagers value independence differently than previous generations * How working as a teenager builds confidence, responsibility, and communication skills * The role of extracurriculars and college competition in shaping teen time use * Whether colleges undervalue work experience compared to other activities If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy This Week’s Drinks 🍻 Jadrian cracked open a Hardywood Fighting Hokie Hefeweizen, although the real story was that he found the unopened can under the seat of his car and has absolutely no idea how it got there. Matt kept things classic with a Dogfish Head 60 Minute IPA. It’s not quite as mysterious, but a reliable go-to. Name That Stat 📊 This week’s statistics covered two very different topics. Jadrian shared an estimate on the share of websites created since 2022 that may have been generated with artificial intelligence. Matt brought data on the share of teenagers participating in the labor force back in 1978, which set up the broader conversation for today’s episode. Show Notes This week’s episode centered on a deceptively simple question: why aren’t teenagers working as much anymore? The decline in teen labor force participation seems to happen in waves, but the long-term trend is unmistakable. One possible explanation is surprisingly simple: fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses, which means fewer have the independence or transportation needed to get to work. If there’s no rush to get out of the house and get a car, perhaps teenagers aren’t finding that same rush to get out and go to work. Another possible explanation is financial. With higher household incomes and smaller family sizes, parents may be more able to support their children without requiring them to earn their own spending money. That removes one of the biggest traditional incentives for teenagers to work in the first place. We also discussed how teenagers spend their time differently today. There’s growing pressure to focus on extracurricular activities, sports, leadership positions, and resume-building experiences, especially as college admissions have become more competitive. But that raises an interesting question: why are unpaid extracurriculars often viewed as more valuable than paid work experience? Finally, we explored the idea that some teenagers may avoid work because they don’t see a direct connection between a part-time job and their future career goals. If the payoff is not immediate or obvious, working may feel less worthwhile. In that sense, the decision not to work can become a strategic one rather than simply a matter of laziness or lack of opportunity. We want to hear from the parents out there: do your teenagers want part-time jobs? If not, what do you think changed compared to when you were growing up? Pop Culture Corner 🍿 Jadrian’s contribution had absolutely nothing to do with teen employment. Instead, he used the opportunity to recommend a new book from friend-of-the-show Brian O’Roark. His new book, Potternomics, explores economics through the world of Harry Potter. Hopefully, we can get Brian to join a future episode and talk Hogwarts economics with us. Turns out Matt also didn’t have a teen employment pop culture reference ready to go, so he pivoted to a guest lyric from Jay-Z on a Diamonds from Sierra Leone (Remix) track: “I’m not a businessman, I’m a business, man.” It’s a surprisingly useful way to think about personal finance and self-investment. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    53 min
  3. APR 23

    The Economics of Non-Compete Agreements

    This episode breaks down what non-compete agreements are and why they’ve become such a hot topic in labor economics. Matt and Jadrian explore when these contracts make sense and when they might go too far. They weigh the trade-offs between protecting company investments and limiting worker mobility, while also digging into recent policy debates and what non-competes mean for innovation and entrepreneurship. In this episode, we talk about: * What non-compete agreements are and why companies use them * Whether it’s reasonable to restrict employees from working for competitors * The fairness (or unfairness) of non-competes after leaving a job * The role of non-competes in limiting job mobility and career growth * State-level bans and the brief FTC attempt to outlaw non-competes nationally * Whether non-competes function similarly to patents in protecting investments If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy: This Week’s Drinks 🍻 This week featured a couple of solid, no-nonsense beer picks. Jadrian went with a Sam Adams Cold Snap White Ale, a citrusy, spiced brew with clementine and orange peel that paired perfectly with chips and homemade salsa. Matt opted for a Founders Centennial IPA, a go-to choice that balances quality with value. Nothing says economist like getting a 15-pack for the price of a 12. Classic Matt. Name That Stat 📊 This week’s stats covered two very different corners of the economy. Matt brought in the surprisingly large number of Bitcoin ATMs in the U.S. after spotting one at a gas station. Jadrian followed up with a stat tied to last week’s conversation, showing that households spend about 5% more on groceries when men do the shopping compared to women. Show Notes Non-compete agreements sound simple at first: you work for a company, and in return, you agree not to work for their competitors. But the reality is much more nuanced. There are two main types: those that apply while you’re employed and those that extend after you leave. The first type makes a lot of intuitive sense. If you’re working for a company, it’s reasonable they don’t want you splitting time or sharing insights with competitors. Things get trickier with post-employment non-competes. On one hand, companies invest real resources into training employees and developing proprietary knowledge. From that perspective, it makes sense to protect that investment. It’s similar to how patents give firms time to profit from innovation before competitors can copy their ideas. But on the other hand, restricting workers after they leave can limit career opportunities and slow down the natural movement of talent in the economy. There can be some vagueness to these agreements that make the situation even stickier. Saying “you can’t work for a competitor” sounds straightforward, but defining a competitor isn’t always obvious. Is LinkedIn a competitor to a job board? Is Google? Without clear boundaries, these agreements can create uncertainty and risk for workers trying to make career moves. Non-competes may reduce job mobility, which is generally seen as healthy for both workers and firms. There’s also the argument that they suppress entrepreneurship. If people can’t leave to start competing businesses, fewer new ideas make it to market. While some claims (like thousands of startups being lost each year) may be overstated, the underlying concern is real. So, do the benefits of non-competes outweigh the economic costs? We’re in another familiar space for economists: it depends. Non-competes can be reasonable in some contexts, but they can also be overused or abused. The challenge is likely in balancing incentives for firms with freedom for workers. Have you ever been subject to a non-compete agreement? If so, did it actually change how you approached your next job search or the opportunities you considered? Pop Culture Corner 🍿 This week’s topic stumped us at first. We couldn’t quickly name a pop culture tie-in for non-competes. After a quick search, we found a great example from Hacks, where Deborah’s non-compete agreement becomes a major plot point. You can see what led up to that moment here: We usually stick to movies, TV, and music, but this time we’re also throwing in a real-world pop culture moment. A quick search reminded us of the famous story of Conan O’Brien navigating a non-compete agreement with NBC in 2010. It’s a good example of how these contracts can play out on a very public stage. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    51 min
  4. APR 9

    How Much Do You Know About Basic Money Questions?

    Explore the current state of financial literacy as we celebrate Financial Literacy Month. We walk through the “Big 3” financial literacy questions and discuss how surprisingly few people answer them correctly. For many people, financial knowledge is learned through experience rather than formal education, but that’s starting to change as more states push for personal finance requirements. In this episode, we talk about: * What Financial Literacy Month highlights and why it matters * The “Big 3” financial literacy questions and how people perform on them * Gaps in financial knowledge across education levels * How personal experiences shape financial understanding * Simple, practical advice for managing money more effectively If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy This Week’s Drinks 🍻 Jadrian is working through a spring variety pack from Samuel Adams, featuring the Breakaway Blonde. Matt has cracked open an Edelmeister IPA from Poland, even though he’s never been to Poland and isn’t entirely sure where this one came from. It’s the middle of April, which means the end of the academic year is approaching. Things are getting busy, but it’s also a time filled with celebrations, ceremonies, and opportunities to recognize students’ accomplishments. Name That Stat 📊 April is Financial Literacy Month, which sets the stage for a conversation about how well people actually understand basic financial concepts, and the answer is: not as well as you might expect. Matt shares a statistic on the average retirement balance for people in their early forties, while Jadrian highlights how people perform on the Big 3 financial literacy questions across different education levels. Show Notes This week’s conversation focuses on how little formal financial education many people receive growing up, and how most people end up learning about money in practice. Even with advanced degrees in economics, it’s easy to feel unprepared when making real financial decisions for the first time. Much of our own understanding came through trial and error: credit card mistakes, missed payments, and learning how interest works in real life. These experiences can be costly, but they often become important turning points in building financial awareness. The “Big 3” questions cover topics on compound interest, inflation, and diversification, and can serve as a simple benchmark for financial literacy. Many people struggle with them, even though these concepts appear in economics courses. That raises a bigger question: are we teaching these ideas in a way that connects to people’s everyday financial decisions? There may be room to better bridge the gap between economic theory and personal finance. Finally, we share some practical advice based on both experience and common guidance. The most consistent recommendations tend to be: (1) build an emergency fund, (2) understand how interest works, especially on debt, (3) avoid carrying credit card balances, and (4) take advantage of employer retirement matches. More than anything, financial success comes down to building consistent habits rather than chasing perfect strategies. Small, steady decisions matter more than people often realize. Do you think we missed something that should be on that list? Let us know in the comments! Pop Culture Corner 🍿 Jadrian went with the song $ave Dat Money by Lil Dicky, which humorously focuses on cutting costs and avoiding unnecessary spending. He’s trying to do something that other rappers just can’t seem to understand. (Warning - NSFW.) Matt brings up an episode of Cheers where Rebecca, facing financial struggles at the bar, thinks the best plan is to use petty cash to buy lottery tickets. It’s definitely an example of questionable financial decision-making. Matt also recommends two books for those interested in personal finance: To Die with Zero and The Simple Path to Wealth. Both offer thoughtful perspectives on money, though they approach the topic from very different angles. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    57 min
  5. MAR 27

    How Early Should You Get to the Airport?

    How early is too early to get to the airport? This episode looks at that question through an economic lens. We explore the tradeoffs between time, risk, and the cost of missing a flight, using data and real travel experiences. What seems like a simple decision turns out to reflect how we think about uncertainty, incentives, and risk. In this episode, we talk about: * The tradeoff between arriving early and risking missed flights * How opportunity cost shapes airport arrival decisions * Real-world data on how early people actually arrive at airports * Why small airports vs. major hubs change optimal timing * Risk aversion in travel decisions and flight planning * Airline incentives, overbooking, and voluntary bumping decisions If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy This Week’s Drinks 🍻 Spring break might be over, but the drinks still feel like spring. Jadrian is trying a Sam Adams Blackberry Wheat Beer from a new variety pack, and Matt is pouring a Kalik from his recent cruise to the Bahamas. It’s a fitting way to celebrate some big news: Susquehanna has been ranked third in the country for undergraduate business experience by Poets & Quants. Name That Stat 📊 Matt kicked off our new segment with a number that highlights the recent jump in fuel prices from late February to mid-March. Jadrian kept things going with another price increase: how much fresh fruit and vegetables have risen over the past year. Show Notes Today’s episode was motivated by an article Matt read about a family who spent $30,000 on a cruise but lost it all at the gate. The issue? They were scheduled to fly into the cruise port the morning of departure, but their flight was delayed just enough that they missed the cruise entirely. We’re not diving into the economics of delays or cancellations, but the story got us thinking about a different question: how early should you get to the airport? It’s a simple setup that highlights a classic tradeoff. Arrive too early and you’re wasting time at the airport. Arrive too late and you risk missing your flight. The “right” choice depends on how you balance time versus risk. Survey data suggests many travelers aim to arrive one to two hours early, though actual behavior varies widely depending on experience and preferences. We share some of our own strategies, but it turns out that Nate Silver has been thinking about this too. Drawing on data from 800 flights, he offers a framework for when travelers should arrive at the airport. His approach considers many of the same factors we talked about, including things like drive time, airport size, and whether you’re flying through a regional airport or a major hub. George Stigler famously observed, “If you never miss a plane, you’re spending too much time at the airport.” It’s a common experience that is also a useful way to think about everyday decision-making. People differ in their tolerance for risk, how they value time, and how flexible they can be if something goes wrong. Whether it’s arriving early, cutting it close, or accepting compensation to take a later flight, each choice reflects a personal optimization problem shaped by constraints and incentives. Would you rather arrive early and wait, or risk missing your flight to save time? Pop Culture Corner 🍿 In a podcast first (we think), Matt ceded his pop culture segment so Jadrian could share two clips. The first comes from Brooklyn Nine-Nine, where a risk-averse character plans to arrive at the airport five hours early for a domestic flight. His coworkers convince him to go even earlier (seven hours ahead of departure). Despite all that, he still ends up missing the flight, though he had (of course) booked a backup flight just in case. In Jadrian’s second clip, he turns to the question of whether to accept airline vouchers to take a later flight. In Life in Pieces, one family repeatedly volunteers to get bumped in exchange for vouchers, only to end up stuck overnight when the last flight is canceled. They take it in stride, though, because the airline covers the hotel. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    48 min
  6. MAR 12

    Can Prediction Markets Really Predict the Future?

    Prediction markets allow people to bet on future events, from elections to economic data releases, with prices reflecting the crowd’s expectations. Economists often view them as powerful forecasting tools because participants have money at stake, which can lead to more accurate predictions than traditional polling. But these markets also raise concerns about manipulation, insider information, and ethical questions about what events should be traded. Together, we explore both the promise and the risks of prediction markets. In this episode, we talk about: * What prediction markets are and how event contracts work * Why prediction markets often outperform traditional polling * The role of incentives and “skin in the game” in improving forecasts * The potential for insider information or manipulation in these markets * Whether prediction markets should be regulated like gambling or financial markets If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy This Week’s Drinks 🍻 We’re checking in together a little earlier than normal since we each have Spring Break trips coming up soon. Matt brings a Ring the Bell American Lager from Conshohocken Brewing Company. In a rare day when he has an IPA and Matt does not, Jadrian opens Liftoff, a West Coast IPA from Daredevil Brewing Company in Indiana, courtesy of a colleague who brought beers to JETSet. Name That Stat 📊 Jadrian shared the number of companies that have filed lawsuits against the federal government seeking tariff reimbursements after a recent Supreme Court ruling. Matt followed with a second number that sparked today’s conversation: the amount a tax economist bet on a prediction market that last year’s DOGE push wouldn’t meaningfully reduce federal spending. Show Notes Matt’s contribution helped us set up a broader discussion of prediction markets. These platforms allow participants to buy and sell contracts based on the outcomes of future events. Contracts usually trade between zero and one dollar, paying out one dollar if the event occurs and nothing if it doesn’t. In practice, the price reflects the market’s estimate of the probability of an event happening. These markets cover everything from elections and economic indicators to corporate decisions and sports outcomes. The tax economist in the story reportedly wagered his life savings that federal spending would remain high despite political pressure to reduce it. His reasoning was grounded in a simple economic insight: entitlement programs make up such a large share of federal spending that short-term policy pushes are unlikely to meaningfully reduce overall expenditures. The bet paid off and illustrates how people with specialized knowledge can profit when they believe markets are mispricing an outcome. We also discuss why economists have long been fascinated by prediction markets. Unlike opinion polls, participants have money on the line, which encourages them to reveal their true beliefs. This “skin in the game” helps prediction markets aggregate information across many individuals and often makes them surprisingly accurate. Some companies have even experimented with internal prediction markets to forecast sales or project outcomes, sometimes outperforming traditional forecasting methods. Of course, prediction markets also raise difficult questions. If someone has inside knowledge or the ability to influence an outcome, they could potentially manipulate the market. Examples range from bets about public speeches to speculation about political behavior. These situations blur the line between information discovery and market manipulation. That leads to the broader policy question: how should prediction markets be regulated? They sit somewhere between gambling and financial markets, and it’s not always clear which rules should apply. Some regulation may be necessary to prevent manipulation or insider trading, but too much could eliminate a tool economists believe provides valuable information about future events. If you could create a prediction market about anything, what event would you want people betting on? Pop Culture Corner 🍿 Jadrian contributed a clip from an Anderson Cooper segment highlighting a man who spent hundreds of dollars trying to win an Xbox at carnival games, but eventually drained his life savings in the process. It should be seen as a cautionary tale about gambling and risk-taking. Matt shares a short clip from a YouTube creator who bets $100 per day on different events in prediction markets. In the clip, the bettor wagers that a State of the Union speech will last longer than 115 minutes and nervously watches the speech unfold as applause and interruptions stretch the clock. The bet ultimately loses when the speech ends just short of the target time. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    43 min
  7. FEB 26

    Is Canada Really Poorer Than Alabama?

    A recent headline claimed that Canada’s GDP per capita has fallen below Alabama’s. That sparked a broader conversation about what GDP per capita actually measures and why it can change in surprising ways. We explored possible explanations, including immigration patterns, post-pandemic growth differences, and policy environments. Along the way, we asked a bigger question: what really drives long-run economic growth? In this episode, we talk about: * Why GDP per capita in Canada now trails Alabama’s * The difference between GDP per capita and median income * How immigration can lower averages even if individuals are better off * Why U.S. GDP per capita has grown steadily since 2020 while Canada, Germany, and the U.K. have stalled * Whether pro-growth business climates actually explain the recent divergence * How stereotypes about “poor” regions can lag behind economic reality If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy Show notes & references We’re nearing the halfway point of the semester, which is a great time to check in with each other. Matt has been working on international initiatives, and Jadrian has been deep in the redesign of his sports economics course. For drinks this week, Matt just returned from a trip to Cyprus and brought back a Shockwave Pale Ale from a small bottle shop. Unfortunately, the pint glass didn’t survive the trip home. Jadrian opted for a Blackberry Lemon Shandy from Rusty Rail, courtesy of a friend in State College. Our data point challenge this episode started with how long it’s been since the U.S. men’s hockey team last won gold at the Winter Olympics. Matt followed that up with two numbers that sparked today’s main topic: Canada’s GDP per capita compared to Alabama’s. From there, we unpacked what GDP per capita actually measures. It’s an average, and averages can move in ways that don’t always reflect individual well-being. We compared this to U.S. median household income data from FRED, which can tell a very different story than GDP per capita. The distinction between median and average matters, especially when population changes are involved. We also looked at recent trends across other developed economies. While U.S. GDP per capita has steadily increased since the pandemic dip, Germany and Canada both saw initial rebounds followed by declines in the past few years. The United Kingdom experienced a similar bounce but has been largely flat more recently. That raises a broader question: what explains the divergence? So what can (and can’t) GDP per capita tell us about well-being? There’s a straightforward “math story” here. Even if everyone in a country is better off than they were before, averages can fall if the population grows quickly and new workers enter at lower wages. True statistics can still be interpreted in misleading ways. We also spent time discussing two popular measures of economic freedom: one from the Heritage Foundation and another from the Fraser Institute. According to the Heritage Foundation’s index, Canada has ranked higher than the U.S. in recent years. That gap may be influenced in part by trade policy uncertainty in the United States, though the full story is more nuanced. While much of our focus was on what might be happening in Canada, we also asked whether Alabama deserves more credit. Cities like Huntsville have worked hard to attract business investment and lower unemployment. The authors of the original article traveled to Alabama expecting one story and came away with another. Stereotypes about regions can linger long after the underlying data changes. If you’re in Canada or Alabama (or Germany, or the U.K.), we’d love to hear your perspective. What are we missing? Pop Culture Corner 🍿 Matt brought up an example of creative destruction, one of the key forces behind long-run income growth. In a classic Friends episode, Joey flips through the Yellow Pages to find a guitar instructor. At the time, those thick books were a household staple. Today, they’re mostly obsolete, replaced by web searches, Yelp, and online directories. Jadrian chose a classic South Park episode that a graduate student recently shared with him. In the scene, immigrants from the future arrive in town and begin undercutting local wages. Residents storm a city council meeting to complain that the newcomers are “taking their jobs” and demand action. It’s exaggerated, but it highlights a real economic tension around immigration, wage competition, and public perception. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    42 min
  8. FEB 12

    Can We Experiment Our Way to Better Teaching?

    We’re joined by Doug McKee to talk about how economists can use assessments and experiments to improve teaching and learning. Doug explains how learning assessments can reveal what students actually understand, not just how they feel about a course. We also discuss the Economic Education Network for Experiments (EENE) and why large, multi-institution studies matter for credibility. Our conversation highlights how economics classrooms can double as powerful research labs for understanding learning itself. In this episode, we talk about: * Doug’s path into economics teaching and education research * Why student learning assessments matter more than course evaluations * How Cornell built a culture around prerequisite and skills-based assessments * The origins and goals of the Economic Education Network for Experiments (ENEE) * Using large, multi-school experiments to test what really works in the classroom If you liked this conversation, you might also enjoy Show notes & references We’re joined this week by Doug McKee, a senior lecturer in economics at Cornell University and one of the leaders behind the Economic Education Network for Experiments. He’s keeping it simple with high-pulp orange juice, while Jadrian braces for another impending snowstorm with a Dark Starr Dry Irish Stout. Matt has logged in with a flight of beers from the back booth at East End Brewing Company in Pittsburgh. Our data point challenge this episode focused on the age of Trump’s most recent announcement regarding the next potential Chair of the Federal Reserve, the number of undergraduate students enrolled at Cornell University, and the number of people who have been killed by ICE agents in Minneapolis so far this year. Doug kicked off the show by sharing his fairly unconventional path into economics education research. After becoming frustrated with the traditional publication process, he realized that he couldn’t stop thinking about teaching. That shift eventually led him to Cornell, where institutional support made it possible to treat teaching as a serious research agenda. A big part of his research agenda involves measuring what students actually learn. Doug has helped Cornell faculty work together to clearly define learning goals and then build assessments around them. Instead of relying only on student evaluations, these tools provide concrete evidence about which skills students gain before and after course redesigns. The assessments started as internal tools and eventually became the foundation for larger studies across institutions. By pooling data from many courses and universities, researchers can separate what works in one classroom from what works more generally, across different student populations and institutional types. This motivation led to the creation of ENEE, a collaborative network that allows instructors to run coordinated experiments in real classrooms. Doug walks through current projects, including studies on team contracts in group work and earlier work on AI and classroom practices. If you could run one large-scale classroom experiment across many universities, what question would you want it to answer? Pop Culture Corner 🍿 Jadrian shared a clip that was sent his way earlier in the week by Charlie Ben-Nathan, an economics educator in London. The clip comes from Yes, Prime Minister and highlights the economic logic behind cigarette taxes, healthcare costs, and unintended consequences. It’s a great illustration of the tradeoffs policymakers face, especially when dealing with goods that generate externalities. With award season underway and the Oscars approaching, Matt took the opportunity to revisit La La Land. A decade after its release, the film still holds up for its music and storytelling, and it turns out to be surprisingly useful for economics examples as well, including ideas like search costs. Doug recommended Ninth House, an adult dark fantasy novel set at Yale and centered on the university’s secret societies. The book blends dark magic, murder, and elite privilege, and it’s written by an author with deep familiarity with Yale’s campus and lore. It makes the setting feel especially vivid for those with New Haven connections. Have a question or topic idea? Reply to this email or drop it in the comments! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.econhappyhour.com

    51 min
5
out of 5
6 Ratings

About

Economics Happy Hour is a podcast where two economics educators talk through current events, teaching, and research over a drink. Conversations are unscripted and focused on how economists actually think about the world and the classroom. www.econhappyhour.com

You Might Also Like