Optimist Economy

Thirty million Americans, more or less, work for themselves. They freelance, do gig work, have solo LLCs, or — as a certain economist says — participate in “ non-employee employment.” The economics of their situation is harder than it needs to be. Making self-employment more viable is good for everyone in the labor market, because when workers have options, they also have more power. Plus: Kathryn Anne Edwards testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, and a congressman implied she wasn't a real American. She has thoughts.Chapters:0:00 — Start/Announcements1:21 — Retcon: Bad banks, good overtime, and testifying before Congress (again)18:17 — Big Pilcrow: Freelancers & non-employer businesses44:42 — Executive orders: national anthem singing rules, Congressional attendance policy47:20 — Spiritual sponsors: Supportive listeners and horchada + cold brew coffee49:01 — Credits Donate to Optimist Economy: https://optimisteconomy.com Video-curious? Watch the Optimist Economy YouTube channel⁠⁠. We’re also on Instagram at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy or TikTok at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy. Chat with other Optimists on Substack. Find utility with our merch: https://merch.ambientinks.com/collections/optimisteconomy Got economic questions, concerns, or executive orders? Send them to optimist.economy@gmail.com

A certain kind of wealthy American has been griping out loud lately — about taxes, about progressive cities, about how unappreciated they are for the jobs they create, the stuff they buy, and the tips they hand out. A narrative is coalescing around them too: that the top 10% of earners now do so much of the spending, the U.S. economy relies on them. But an economy that depends so much on the people at the top isn't the healthy one the country deserves — it’s just wearing a nice suit.Chapters:00:00:56 Announcements: Q&A episode questions wanted 00:01:18 Retcon: The 86 debate; FDR's full "calamity howling executives" quote 00:05:32 Terms & Conditions: Wealth Effect and Zugzwang 00:09:26 Big Pilcrow: Should we cherish the ultra-wealthy?00:36:41 Executive Orders: Retire "mummies"; union credits on red carpets 00:39:34 Spiritual Sponsors: Mellow Cello podcast; enormous floral arrangementsFurther ReadingMoody's claim that the top 10% of earners now drive nearly half of consumer spending in the WSJ:https://www.wsj.com/economy/consumers/us-economy-strength-rich-spending-2c34a571The Minneapolis Fed on what the underlying data actually shows. https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2026/have-us-consumers-gone-k-shaped-a-review-of-the-dataWealthy part-time New Yorkers reacting to a proposed pied-à-terre tax in the Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/3283eaab-e9cf-41e6-a028-5a02fb6f4615The Wall Street Journal on second-home taxes spreading from New York City to other states, including the San Diego homeowner who'd like to be cherished. https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/taxes-on-second-homes-are-springing-up-across-america-93a64448Full reading list at https://optimisteconomy.substack.com Donate to Optimist Economy: https://optimisteconomy.com Video-curious? Watch the Optimist Economy YouTube channel⁠⁠. We’re also on Instagram at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy or TikTok at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy. Chat with other Optimists on Substack. Find utility with our merch: https://merch.ambientinks.com/collections/optimisteconomy Got economic questions, concerns, or executive orders? Send them to optimist.economy@gmail.com

Cash is dirty, inconvenient, and so last century. Some 70% of Americans under age 50 think its days are numbered. But we still need those greenbacks, if as an alternative to banks. More than 4% of households are “unbanked,” and three times as many are “underbanked,” meaning bank services mostly don’t work for them, so rely on services like check cashers or payday lenders. And that's before you get to the racial disparities in who banks approve for credit. Reviving banking services at the post office might be one way to help the unbanked and keep from handing yet more power to the finance sector. Chapters:00:00:48 Announcements00:02:30 Retcon: Semiquincentennia 00:03:35 Terms & Conditions: ChexSystems, Unbanked00:05:46 Big Pilcrow: What’s keeping the U.S. from going cashless?00:38:28 Executive Orders: Regulate youth sports schedules; Airline baggage fees by weight.00:40:56 Spiritual Sponsors: Artemis splashdown; Friends with season tickets. Donate to Optimist Economy: https://optimisteconomy.com Video clips available at the Optimist Economy YouTube channel⁠⁠. We’re also on Instagram at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy or TikTok at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy. You can also search for us on Facebook and chat with other Optimists on Substack. Consume leisure while donning Optimist merch: https://merch.ambientinks.com/collections/optimisteconomy Have a questions for our next Q&A? Send it to optimist.economy@gmail.com

An essay went viral by claiming that $140,000 is what a family of four needs to just get by — a number higher than what 70% of American households earn. Conservative economists called it idiotic. Kathryn dismissed it and got a nasty DM. What’s the real controversy? It’s not that the poverty line is misleading. It's that we have no measure for our current affordability crisis. And the American mindset has been so warped by decades of bad economic policy that we think the only way to get help is to prove that we’re poor.END NOTES: The essay in question: Part 1: My Life Is a Lie - by Michael W. Green, What economists thought: Viral essay says $140,000 should be the new poverty line - The Washington Post ; Cato: The $140,000 ‘Poverty Line’ Is Laughably Wrong, So Why Does It Feel Right? ; AEI: How Not to Redefine Poverty How U.S. poverty measures actually work: Two Ways the U.S. Census Bureau Measures Poverty to Capture Clearer Picture of Poverty in America Kathryn on Money with Katie (at min. 35) Watch video clips from this episode at the Optimist Economy YouTube channel⁠⁠.Follow us on Instagram at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy.Follow us on TikTok at ⁠⁠@optimist_economy.Read some stuff on our Substack.Consume leisure in an O.E. hat or shirt: https://merch.ambientinks.com/collections/optimisteconomySupport us and our tireless editors and producers by donating: https://optimisteconomy.comAnd send your economic questions, concerns, or executive orders: optimist.economy@gmail.com

Hey optimists! Season two of Optimist Economy is finally here. New episodes coming on Tuesdays starting January 27. More at www.optimisteconomy.com

Your drunk uncle calls Social Security a Ponzi scheme. Your crypto-bro cousin thinks tariffs make China pay. Your grandfather blames working women for tanking wage growth. Economist Kathryn Edwards takes on a dozen hostile dinner-table challenges to help optimists everywhere prepare for dinner table debate. Robin plays every annoying relative you've ever argued with. Pass the [expletive] gravy. Ready to rep Optimist Economy with a shirt, hat or tote bag? Hit up our new website and merch store at optimisteconomy.com Take the listener survey first to get a code for a free Original Optimist sticker: https://tinyurl.com/op-econ-survey

Why is anyone’s health insurance tied to their job? It's because of a superintendent in Dallas, World War II wage freezes, a 1953 tax code quirk, and decades of inertia. This accident of history costs America $384 billion a year in tax breaks to corporations for providing coverage. And what do we get for that? A system that locks people in jobs they'd otherwise leave, suppresses wages of those who look "expensive to insure," and disadvantages small businesses that can't afford gold-level health plans. In a different historical timeline, President Harry S. Truman’s 1945 national health plan would've given us universal coverage, paid medical leave, and government-funded medical schools. But of course we’re not living in that timeline.Take Our Listener Survey!https://tinyurl.com/op-econ-survey