Good ideas are our stock-in-trade. Solid research is our brand. That’s why it was so refreshing—even rewarding—to see TPPF Chief Economist Vance Ginn’s debut in the Wall Street Journal, “’Build Back Better’ Would Sink the Labor Market,” receive much-deserved attention and praise in recent days.
“It would tax those who produce and subsidize those who don’t,” Vance explains with his co-author, Casey Mulligan. “It would encourage dependency on government and punish self-sufficiency.”
Ben Shapiro mentioned it on his radio show.
It was mentioned by BizPac Review, a conservative news site, as it challenged AOC’s claims that Republicans opposed to the plan merely fear a “changing country.”
And renowned economist Dan Mitchell favorably cited Vance’s numbers, even as they differed from his own.
“And part of the difference is that economists rarely agree on anything because there are so many variables and different experts will assign different weights to those variables,” Mitchell writes. “So the purpose of sharing these numbers is not to pretend that any particular study perfectly estimates the effect of Biden’s agenda, but rather to simply get a sense of the likely magnitude of the economic damage.”
(One day, I’m going to take Vance and our other economists out for lunch, and ask in an innocent voice, “How should we divide the check?” And for the next three hours, I’ll just sit there and eat the chips and salsa.)
Congress is moving quickly to a showdown over the “Build Back Better” plan. TPPF’s research is playing a big part in that.