Pitchfork Economics with Nick Hanauer

Over the last 50 years, nearly $79 trillion that could have gone to the bottom 90%…didn’t.

Where did it go—and what did that cost you?

Nick and Goldy are joined by Carter Price, senior mathematician at the RAND Corporation, to break down how rising inequality reshaped wages, growth, and even the federal budget—and why the economy feels so disconnected from everyday life. Because this isn’t just about who got richer. It’s about what everyone else lost.

Carter Price is a Senior Mathematician at the RAND Corporation and Professor of Policy Analysis at the RAND School of Public Policy

Social Media:

@CarterCPrice

Further reading: 

Measuring the Income Gap from 1975 to 2023

RAND Budget Model: Groundbreaking insights into the everyday impacts of federal policy

Unlocking the Tax Code with RAND's Tax Code Analysis Tool

Preliminary Strategies for Reducing the Burden of Federal Debt

Impacts of the Retirement Savings for Americans Act

Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com

Facebook: Pitchfork Economics Podcast

Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social

Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics

Threads: pitchforkeconomics

TikTok: @pitchfork_econ

YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics

LinkedIn: Pitchfork Economics

Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer

Substack: ⁠The Pitch⁠

What Is Swiftynomics—and Why Does It Matter?

Taylor Swift didn’t just break records—she broke the way economists think about the economy. Because if one artist can reshape entire cities overnight, what else are we missing?

This week, economist Misty Heggeness uses the “Swift effect” to expose a bigger problem: the models we rely on weren’t built to see women’s power, unpaid care, or culture as real economic forces.

What would change about our economy if we actually counted women’s work—and treated culture as real economic power?

Misty Heggeness is an economist and the author of Swiftynomics: How Women Mastermind and Redefine Our Economy, which uses Taylor Swift and broader pop culture as a lens for examining women’s economic power, labor markets, and the persistent blind spots in mainstream economic thinking.

Social Media:

mlheggeness

@m_heggeness

Further reading: 

Swiftynomics: How Women Mastermind and Redefine Our Economy

Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com

Facebook: Pitchfork Economics Podcast

Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social

Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics

Threads: pitchforkeconomics

TikTok: @pitchfork_econ

YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics

LinkedIn: Pitchfork Economics

Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer

Substack: ⁠The Pitch⁠

The price you see online might not be the real price.

A new investigation found that Instacart was quietly running pricing experiments—charging different customers different prices for the same groceries at the same time.

This week, Paul and Goldy talk with Groundwork Collaborative Executive Director Lindsay Owens about how companies are using AI and massive data sets to run experiments on consumers—testing exactly how much each of us is willing to pay.

And if every shopper sees a different price, one big question follows:

Do markets still work the way economists say they do?

Lindsay Owens is the Executive Director of the economic think tank Groundwork Collaborative and author of the forthcoming book, GOUGED: The End of a Fair Price in America.

Further Reading: 

Same Cart, Different Price: Instacart’s Price Experiments Cost Families at Checkout

We Had 400 People Shop For Groceries. What We Found Will Shock You.

Gouged: The End of a Fair Price--and What That Means for Your Wallet

Social Media:

BlueSky: @lindsayowens.bsky.social

Instagram: @lindsayowensphd

TikTok: @lindsayowensphd

Twitter: @owenslindsay1

BlueSky: @groundwork.bsky.social

Twitter: @Groundwork

Organizations developing policy on surveillence pricing: 

American Economic Liberties Project

Economic Security Project

Tech Equity

Consumer Reports 

More Perfect Union

Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com

Facebook: Pitchfork Economics Podcast

Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social

Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics

Threads: pitchforkeconomics

TikTok: @pitchfork_econ

YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics

LinkedIn: ⁠Pitchfork Economics⁠

Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer

Substack: The Pitch

Economic debates often focus on poverty — how to raise wages, strengthen safety nets, and ensure people don’t fall too far behind. But what if fairness also requires asking a different question: how much wealth is too much?

This week, we’re resharing our conversation with ethics professor Ingrid Robeyns about her idea of limitarianism — the argument that societies should place moral limits on extreme wealth accumulation. Rather than starting with policy prescriptions, Robeyns asks a deeper question about justice, democracy, and what kind of economy we want to live in.

As inequality continues to dominate public debate, this conversation invites listeners to reconsider something we rarely question: not just how to lift people up, but whether an economy without limits at the top can truly work for everyone.

Ingrid Robeyns is a distinguished scholar and Professor of Ethics of Institutions at Utrecht University, and author of the new book, Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth. Professor Robeyns’ research in the field of Ethics and Political Philosophy focuses on issues of justice, inequality, well-being, and the ethical dimensions of societal structures and policies.

Social Media:

@ingridrobeyns.bsky.social

 @IngridRobeyns

Further reading: 

Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth

Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com

Facebook: Pitchfork Economics Podcast

Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social

Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics

Threads: pitchforkeconomics

TikTok: @pitchfork_econ

YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics

LinkedIn: Pitchfork Economics

Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer

Substack: ⁠The Pitch⁠

Every wave of new technology has come with the same promise: productivity rises, and everyone benefits. That’s not how it usually plays out.

This week, we’re resharing our conversation with MIT economist David Autor, one of the world’s leading experts on how technological change reshapes labor markets. Autor challenges the familiar story that innovation inevitably destroys good jobs, arguing instead that AI could expand human expertise and help rebuild pathways into the middle class — if the gains are broadly shared.

As companies race to adopt AI and workers wonder what comes next, this episode offers a clearer way to think about the future of work: technology doesn’t determine economic outcomes. The rules we build around it do.

David Autor is a labor economist and professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies how technological change and globalization affect workers. He is also co-director of the MIT Shaping the Future of Work Initiative and the National Bureau of Economic Research Labor Studies Program.

Social Media:

@davidautor.bsky.social

@davidautor

Further reading: 

NOEMA - AI Could Actually Help Rebuild The Middle Class

New York Times - How One Tech Skeptic Decided A.I. Might Benefit the Middle Class

Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com

Facebook: Pitchfork Economics Podcast

Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social

Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics

Threads: pitchforkeconomics

TikTok: @pitchfork_econ

YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics

LinkedIn: Pitchfork Economics

Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer

Substack: ⁠The Pitch⁠