April 8, 2026

…AND CHEAPER…:

Economists Once Dismissed the A.I. Job Threat, but Not Anymore (Ben Casselman, April 3, 2026, NY Times)

In a working paper published this week, a team of researchers surveyed economists about their outlook over the next five and 25 years. Most expect the economy to grow a bit more quickly as A.I. improves, but not to diverge substantially from historical patterns. If the technology improves rapidly — a possibility they consider unlikely but plausible — they envision a far more drastic scenario with faster growth but also greater inequality and the disappearance of millions of jobs.

“Economists are certainly taking A.I. seriously,” said Ezra Karger, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago who was one of the study’s authors.

BUT WHAT DOES THE rIGHT/lEFT HAVE LEFT IF THEY ACCEPT THE FACTS?:

Behind the Scenes with Oren Cass, Policy-Based Evidence Maker: A Revealing Email Exchange (Scott Winship, Apr 02, 2026, First World Problems)


Our saga begins with a chart in a paper I wrote and ends with a sentence in a new American Compass report citing me. In late 2022, I wrote Bringing Home the Bacon, which examined whether the evolution of young men’s earnings could explain the sharp decline in sole-breadwinner families or the dramatic increase in single motherhood. Many populists argue that a deterioration in men’s economic standing has led to these changes. My report showed that real median annual compensation among young men was essentially the same in 2019 as in 1969 and that by various “marriageability” thresholds, young men were “at, near, or above historic highs.” That ruled out declining male earnings an explanation for the striking changes in the family that occurred over this period.

In my paper, I made a number of conservative methodological choices because I wanted to show that male marriageability had not declined even using methods that worked against that result. Nevertheless, in public events, podcasts, and even the inaugural post for his “Understanding America” Substack, Cass highlighted that young men’s earnings were lower or no higher than “50 years ago.” He did so again during our 2024 debate on the state of the economy.

After the latter, I took to X to share some updated results that I didn’t get a chance to mention in the debate. I indicated that, using an improved price index that I had developed earlier that month, young men’s real median post-tax compensation rose 20 percent from 1973 to 2019, or $7,200, and rose 24 percent ($8,500) from 1989 to 2019. Optimistically, I wrote, regarding whether young men’s earnings have stagnated over 50 years, “I’ll trust my chart doesn’t get cited anymore in support of that claim!” I also stated unambiguously that, “In case it’s not clear, the chart [showing stagnant earnings] was what I considered the best evidence then, but it is not the best evidence now. You [Cass] can still cite it, obviously, but you should either say why you think it is still the best evidence or clarify that you don’t care.”

“AGAINST THAT INCREDIBLE WEIGHT”:

Gillian Welch: This Land is Her Land (Jewly Hight, April 1, 2026, Bitter Southerner)

It pleases Welch when songs prove to be malleable in meaning. “I love that Dave and I kill ourselves working to make things just so,” she says, “and then we put them out there into the world and they can do anything and mean anything to anybody. That’s why we work so hard on them.” But there is one way of interpreting the spirit of their music that bothers her: “If someone were to think that our songs are maudlin or pessimistic, I would be shocked. Because I hear them as strong, quiet. I think if you really digest those narratives, there’s an incredible undercurrent of perseverance. When we’re singing those songs, we think the people are going to make it through.” Lange had a similar perspective on the people she photographed weathering the cruel deprivations of the Depression. “I many times encountered courage,” she told a Smithsonian archivist. “Real courage. Undeniable courage.”

There’s another point upon which Welch is insistent: she and Rawlings haven’t walled their material off in the past by depicting characters in the throes of displacement, hardship, and economic precarity. She throws out hypothetical questions: “Do people not still have children who die tragic early deaths? Of course they do. Do people not still take narcotics to try to ease the pain for a moment? Of course they do.” “One More Dollar,” her song about the inner turmoil of a migrant worker caught between the necessity of toiling for meager but essential pay and a longing to be back with the people they love, has powerful resonance at a time when when ICE raids — blatantly driven by racial profiling and often targeting businesses staffed by immigrants — have created life and death stakes nationwide.

Welch’s singing, initially squarely in the austere Appalachian tradition, has developed a miraculous blend of leanness and litheness over the years. Her recordings of “Dark Turn of Mind,” on 2011’s The Harrow & The Harvest, and “Here Stands a Woman,” on 2024’s Woodland, are fine examples; she applies her reedy instrument to supple slides, bluesy bends, and insinuating phrasing. What comes through in Welch’s vocals is a sense of bearing up beneath the weight of the world.

When I describe this quality, she confirms that she feels it too, and points to the influence of Jerry Garcia’s singing. Recently, she tried to turn a friend on to the Dead, and received a disappointing reaction. “They just sound really tired to me,” the friend commented dismissively. That left Welch feeling at least partially justified: “I said, ‘Well, yes, of course they’re tired. They’re touring musicians. They’re exhausted. But don’t you hear that [Garcia’s] constantly pushing up against that incredible weight?’”

So many folk and country songs pine for the idealized and unchanging old home place and the saintly, nurturing mother figure who waits there. But there’s an equally long tradition of ballads of the rambling, rootless, implicitly male troubadour. The Dead served as colorful embodiments of the latter role, and Nevins, Welch’s college buddy, could see her migrating toward it before she’d formally chosen music as her vocation.

THE REVOLUTION EATS ITSELF:

The Historical Irony of Feminism’s Silencing of Women (Abigail Favale, November 30, 2021, Church Life Journal)


When I was in graduate school, I remember reading an essay in which Jacques Derrida purports to “write as a woman.” I was in a gender studies program in a highly secular context, and we had a lively seminar on Derrida’s essay, eventually reaching the consensus that no, Jacques, you can’t simply step into a woman’s identity like you might step into a set of trousers. This was the mid-2000s, a different era, when the word “woman” still had some fleeting connection, however tenuous, to female embodiment.

Now, fifteen years later, we have reached a juncture where appropriating the identity of women is considered laudatory, liberating, the next frontier of civil rights—and raising cautions or questions is blasphemous. Increasingly, defining a woman as an adult human female is considered hate speech.

ALL FOOD IS AMERICAN FOOD:

The Decision That Would Create a Permanent American Underclass (Padma Lakshmi, 4/01/26, NY Times)

The principle predates the Constitution. Our colonial history brought the tradition over from the British, who recognized that birth on a nation’s soil carried citizenship. Later, after the shameful Dred Scott decision of 1857 denied citizenship to Black Americans, the nation fought a Civil War and corrected that injustice for all future Americans with the 14th Amendment. Designed to reflect America’s diverse identity, it codified birthright citizenship and placed citizenship beyond the whims of any one politician.

The law on birthright citizenship is clear, and a majority of Americans support it. But Mr. Trump refuses to accept limits on his ethnic gatekeeping and his attempts to bend the Constitution to his will. And he fails to recognize that birthright citizenship is American culture.

Our country’s cuisine shows it. I regularly work with chefs who blend their ancestral recipes with local staples to bring us meals that forge a culture for all of us. In the United States, we savor flavors from around the world precisely because birthright citizenship has been the law of the land for generations. I’ve visited the Nigerian American community in Houston, where the suya spice brought me back to the masala of my own childhood. I’ve eaten the cuisine of Cambodian refugees, as well as their children and grandchildren, in Lowell, Mass. And I’ve slurped delicious ceviche with Peruvian chefs in hipster Brooklyn.


America is interesting and strong because of the contributions of immigrants and their children, mixing with the ingredients of other cultures and evolving over time, creating both a blend of the world’s cuisines and our own unique food culture all at once.