The first three minutes of this video present the questions. I agree, they are a lot of fun to present Liberals with. (Some of the last twelve minutes discusses the origins of the Great Recession--and Barney Frank's underemphasized role--and is also interesting.)
When the money starts to run out, sooner or later, good sense will prevail.
Only three cities are evaluated. New York and Chicago get "F" grades, while Los Angeles gets a "D".
Conclusion of the abstract:
Conditional on seniority, which dictates choice sets, the weekly earnings gap can be explained entirely by differences in operator choices of hours, schedules, and routes.
Link via Marginal Revolution.
Guess. Go ahead, guess.
From the Brookings Institution. Not, the last time I checked, a member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.
Rent control appears to help affordability in the short run for current tenants, but in the long-run decreases affordability, fuels gentrification, and creates negative externalities on the surrounding neighborhood. These results highlight that forcing landlords to provide insurance to tenants against rent increases can ultimately be counterproductive.
Professor Gordon agrees with, and expands on, the assertion that "Econ 1 (or Econ 101) is all you really need". (I agree, too.)
He recommends The Economic Way of Thinking, which I also like. And I'll plug Trade-Offs: An Introduction to Economic Reasoning and Social Issues, Second Edition. (It's narrower in scope, but the benefit is a tight focus on a really important idea in economics.
Related, by Paul Rubin: "We Must Teach College Students Basic Economics".
And end crony capitalism and corporate welfare while you’re at it.
Ditto.
Related, by Richard Epstein: "The Problem With Soft Socialism".
Sad and chilling.
How anybody could seriously think this is beyond me. But Russ Roberts does a nice job of explaning why the proposition is false.