Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

Macro Roundup


Thursday, September 19, 2024

AI Summary. Income after transfers and taxes grew most for households in the highest quintile, a rate that would have been nearly the same without temporary pandemic policies such as recovery rebate credits, expanded unemployment compensation, and the expanded child tax credit. Those policies raised average income in the lowest quintile to $48,700 from $41,200 without them.

Bilal Habib, Edward Harris, John McClelland, and Joseph Rosenberg Congressional Budget Office
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

From 2019 to 2021, income after transfers and taxes for the top quintile grew by 19% (largely from realized capital gains), the bottom quintile grew by 17% (primarily from temporary transfers), and the middle quintiles by 5%.

How did temporary pandemic policies affect household income across income quintiles?

Core argument: Income after transfers and taxes rose most in 2021 for households in the highest quintile, whose growth rate would have been almost the same without the temporary recovery rebate credit, expanded unemployment compensation, and expanded child tax credit.

In 2021, income after transfers and taxes increased the most for households in the highest quintile. (Income from realized capital gains, which mostly accrues to higher-income households, was higher in 2021 than in any other year since at least 1979.) The rate of income growth for households in that quintile would have been almost the same if the new temporary policies—the recovery rebate credit, expanded unemployment compensation, and the expanded child tax credit—had not been in place. Households in the lowest quintile benefitted the most from those policies, which increased their average income after transfers and taxes to $48,700. Had it not been for those policies, average household income in the lowest quintile would have been $41,200, which is lower than it was in 2019, before the onset of the pandemic ($41,600, in 2021 dollars). Average income after transfers and taxes decreased for households in the middle three quintiles of the distribution from $90,200 in 2020 to $89,200 in 2021. It would have been even lower in 2021 ($83,500) without the effects of temporary policies.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Income after transfers and taxes rose most in 2021 for households in the highest quintile, whose growth rate would have been almost the same without the temporary recovery rebate credit, expanded unemployment compensation, and expanded child tax credit.
  2. Temporary policies raised average income after transfers and taxes for the lowest quintile to $48,700 in 2021, compared with $41,200 without them, below the $41,600 recorded in 2019 in 2021 dollars.
  3. Average income after transfers and taxes for the middle three quintiles fell from $90,200 in 2020 to $89,200 in 2021, and would have been $83,500 without the temporary policies.

Related Articles:

AI Summary. The authors forecast a longer string of consecutive 0.25-point Federal Reserve rate cuts, bringing the federal funds rate to a terminal level of 3.25–3.5%. Bond market pricing implies 31–36 basis points of cuts at each of the next four meetings, still leaving a meaningful chance of additional half-point cuts.

David Mericle Goldman Sachs
Date Posted:

After yesterday’s 50bp cut, David Mericle @GoldmanSachs forecasts a string of 25 bp cuts, with the FFR reaching a terminal rate of 3.25-3.5% in June 2025, a slightly slower pace of cuts than implied by market pricing.

How fast will the Fed cut rates toward its terminal level?

Core argument: The Fed began its cutting cycle with a 50bp reduction at the September FOMC meeting, and the revised forecast calls for consecutive 25bp cuts from November 2024 through June 2025.

We have revised our Fed forecast to accelerate the pace of cuts next year. We now forecast a longer string of consecutive 25bp cuts from November 2024 through June 2025, when the funds rate would reach our terminal rate forecast of 3.25-3.5% (vs. our previous forecast of consecutive cuts this year but quarterly cuts next year). The bond market is now pricing 31-36bp of rate cuts for each of the next four meetings, a bit less than before today’s meeting but still implying a meaningful possibility of additional 50bp cuts.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The Fed began its cutting cycle with a 50bp reduction at the September FOMC meeting, and the revised forecast calls for consecutive 25bp cuts from November 2024 through June 2025.
  2. The revised forecast has the federal funds rate reaching a terminal rate of 3.25–3.5% by June 2025, replacing a prior path of consecutive cuts in 2024 followed by quarterly cuts in 2025.
  3. The bond market is pricing 31–36bp of rate cuts for each of the next four meetings, slightly less than before the September meeting but still implying a meaningful possibility of additional 50bp cuts.

Related Articles:

  • Quantifying What Fed Cuts Mean for GDP and Inflation — A simulation using a simplified version of the Federal Reserve's model of the US economy estimates that a 100bps cut in the federal funds rate plus guidance for 150bps more would raise GDP by 2% and inflation by 1%. The author argues such cuts would lift stock prices, tighten credit spreads, and risk reaccelerating growth and inflation.
  • Interest Rates Are Too High. The Fed Should Cut by a Half Point — Consumer price inflation has fallen to 2.5% and core inflation on the Federal Reserve's preferred gauge to an estimated 2.7%, with the remaining gap above the 2% target largely reflecting lagged effects of earlier housing and auto price increases. Inflation-indexed markets project 1.8% consumer price inflation over the coming year.
  • When Big Cuts Are Bad — An aggressive Federal Reserve rate-cutting campaign may not benefit risk assets, because it would weaken the dollar at a time when foreign investors hold about 20% of U.S. corporate equities. A weaker dollar imposes currency losses on those investors, which could prompt them to sell U.S. equities and dollars, deepening the decline.

AI Summary. A report estimates that a selectionist U.S. immigration policy—securing the border, reducing low-skilled immigration, and expanding high-skilled immigration—would cut future federal debt by trillions of dollars, providing over $2tn in net present value in the first year and over $200bn annually thereafter. Under the proposal, annual legal immigration falls from about 1m to roughly 860,000.

Daniel Di Martino Manhattan Institute
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

.@DanielDiMartino notes higher-skilled immigrants reduce expected deficits, and proposes a policy of selective legalization, coupled with mass deportations to reduce Federal debt by about $1.9 trillion.

Would shifting immigration toward high-skilled workers reduce federal debt by trillions?

Core argument: The report's proposed legislative package would provide over $2 trillion in net present value in its first year and over $200 billion each subsequent year, excluding any additional productivity growth from high-skilled immigration.

By enacting a selectionist immigration policy—which requires securing the border from unlawful immigration, reducing low-skilled immigration, and expanding high-skilled immigration—the U.S. could reduce future federal debt by trillions of dollars over the long run. This report proposes a legislative package that provides over $2 trillion in net present value during the first year and over $200 billion each subsequent year, without accounting for the additional productivity growth resulting from high-skilled immigration. Furthermore, under these reforms, the annual number of immigrants who are new permanent residents decreases by about 15% after a temporary legalization program and a partial clearing of the employment-based visa backlog. Over the long term, annual legal immigration decreases under this plan from approximately 1 million in FY 2019 to approximately 860,000.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The report's proposed legislative package would provide over $2 trillion in net present value in its first year and over $200 billion each subsequent year, excluding any additional productivity growth from high-skilled immigration.
  2. A selectionist immigration policy—securing the border against unlawful immigration, reducing low-skilled immigration, and expanding high-skilled immigration—could reduce future U.S. federal debt by trillions of dollars over the long run, according to the report.
  3. Under the proposed reforms, annual legal immigration falls from roughly 1 million in FY 2019 to about 860,000, with new permanent residents declining about 15% after a temporary legalization program and partial clearing of the employment-based visa backlog.

Related Articles:

  • How Immigration Remade the U.S. Labor Force — The Congressional Budget Office estimates more than 9m people have migrated on net to the U.S. in recent years, nearly matching the prior decade's total and lifting population growth to almost 1.2% a year. Fewer than 30% are lawful permanent residents; without immigration, growth would be 0.2%.
  • The Demographic Outlook: 2024 to 2054 — The Congressional Budget Office projects the US population will grow from 342mm in 2024 to 383mm in 2054, an average 0.4% a year — less than half the 0.9% pace of the prior five decades. Immigration accounts for about 70% of growth over the next decade and for all population growth beginning in 2040.
  • Without Immigrants, US Working-Age Population Would Shrink — All net US employment growth since early 2020 has been among foreign-born workers, and without immigration the US working-age population would be shrinking — a pattern likely to persist for the rest of the decade. The jump in immigration appears to be enabling a soft landing that most economists had thought impossible.

AI Summary. National polls show the two presidential candidates tied at 47%, while in Pennsylvania the Democratic candidate leads 50% to 46%. Economic pessimism is widespread: 77% of likely Pennsylvania voters rate the economy poor or fair versus 22% who call it excellent or good, including in Democratic strongholds.

Shane Goldmacher and Ruth Igielnik New York Times
Date Posted:

The latest Times/Siena poll shows the race for the White House is a dead heat nationally, with Harris and Trump both at 47% (margin of error 3pp). In PA, Harris is leading 50% to 46%, with 77% of likely PA voters reporting dim views of the economy.

Does widespread economic pessimism accompany a deadlocked presidential race?

Core argument: Trump and Harris are tied nationally at 47% each, while Harris leads in Pennsylvania 50% to 46%, in polls that also found Harris had the stronger debate performance.

Nationally, Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris are knotted at 47%. In Pennsylvania, Ms. Harris leads, 50% to 46%. The surveys were conducted almost entirely before the second apparent assassination attempt against Mr. Trump last Sunday. Concerns about the state of the economy remain widespread. In Pennsylvania, 77% of likely voters said the economy was poor or fair, with only 22% calling it excellent or good. That negative view held true even in key Democratic regions, including Philadelphia and its surrounding suburbs.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Trump and Harris are tied nationally at 47% each, while Harris leads in Pennsylvania 50% to 46%, in polls that also found Harris had the stronger debate performance.
  2. In Pennsylvania, 77% of likely voters called the economy poor or fair and only 22% called it excellent or good, a negative view that held even in Philadelphia and its suburbs.
  3. The surveys were conducted almost entirely before the second apparent assassination attempt against Trump.

Related Articles:

  • Many Gen Z Men Feel Left Behind. Some See Trump As An Answer — National polling shows a gender gap of roughly 39 to 51 percentage points among voters under 30, with young men favoring the Republican candidate and young women favoring the Democrat. The Republican message resonates particularly with young men without college degrees and young men of color.
  • An Unsettled Electorate: How Uncertainty and Apathy Are Shaping the 2024 Election — A survey of young registered voters finds 54% backing Biden and 46% backing Trump, with 60% of young women supporting Biden while 52% of young men support Trump. Young men are more likely than young women to say the country has gone too far in giving women equal rights, 19% versus 9%.
  • Disconnected: The Growing Class Divide in American Civic Life — 17% of Americans report having no close friends, and survey data show a wide educational gap: 24% of those with a high school education or less have no close friends versus 10% of college graduates. Three decades ago, Americans with less formal education reported social circles at least as large.

Friday, September 20, 2024

AI Summary. For a two-adult, three-child family, existing taxes and government benefits bring take-home resources to about $58,000 with no earnings, $79,000 with $20,000 of earnings, and $90,000 with $80,000 of earnings plus $15,000 in employer health premiums. A $75,000 gap in earnings and work-related benefits narrows to $11,000 in take-home pay.

Kevin Corinth American Enterprise Institute
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

A 2-adult, 3-child US family with $20,000 of market income receives at least $61,000 in annual benefits and has $79,000 of disposable income. That same family earning a market income of $80,000 takes home only $11,000 more. @kevincorinth

How much do taxes and benefits compress income differences across families?

Core argument: A 2-adult, 3-child family with no earnings receives existing benefits worth about $58,000 per year.

The figure shows the total take-home pay—including earnings, employer provided benefits, government benefits, and adjusting for taxes—for a 2-adult, 3-child family with different earnings levels: a nonworking family with no earnings, a low-wage family with $20,000 of annual earnings, and a middle-wage family with $80,000 of annual earnings. The nonworking family receives total existing benefits worth about $58,000 despite having no earnings of its own. The low-wage family, after accounting for all existing taxes and government benefits, takes home $79,000. The middle-wage family has annual earnings of $80,000, and they receive health insurance from their employer, which contributes $15,000 per year to their premiums. In total, the family has earnings and work-related benefits that total $95,000—before counting the effect of any taxes or government benefits—which is $75,000 more than the earnings of the low-wage family. But once we account for existing taxes and benefits, the middle-wage family takes home only $11,000 more than the low-wage family, a total of $90,000.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. A 2-adult, 3-child family with no earnings receives existing benefits worth about $58,000 per year.
  2. A low-wage 2-adult, 3-child family earning $20,000 annually takes home $79,000 after accounting for all existing taxes and government benefits.
  3. A middle-wage family with $80,000 of earnings plus $15,000 in employer-paid health premiums has $95,000 before taxes and benefits—$75,000 more than the low-wage family—yet takes home $90,000, only $11,000 more.

Related Articles:

AI Summary. Government bonds serve both as insurance against flight-to-quality events and as risky investments whose returns depend on the government not inflating debt away in a crisis. The argument holds that investors should demand a premium compensating for inflation risk, and a larger one if inflation losses would coincide with other painful financial events.

John Cochrane The Grumpy Economist
Date Posted:

.@JohnHCochrane notes that long bonds benefit from “flights to quality” as in 2008, and did as well as stocks from 1970 to 2000, but pose the risk that in a crisis of unsustainable deficits, the government will “inflate them away. Caveat emptor.”

Should bond investors demand a premium for inflation risk?

Core argument: Government bonds are both hedges and risky investments, offering insurance against flight-to-quality events while delivering returns as good as stocks from 1970 to 2000 in exchange for the gamble that the government will not inflate them away in a crisis.

As 1979 followed 1975, a repetition of the 2021-2023 inflation, provoked by the next crisis, or even the Fed’s apparent return to 1978 monetary policy, is not an event that prudent risk-management should ignore. Is an inflation-induced loss a particularly painful time for you? If not, yes, insist on a premium that compensates for the probability of inflation. But [if] inflation comes with particularly painful other events in your financial life, insist on a good deal more. Bonds are both hedges and risky investment opportunities. In a nutshell, government bonds offer insurance against flight to quality events, useful for some kinds of investors. Bonds offer a return that can be as good as stocks, as seen from 1970 to 2000, in return for the [gamble] that the government will not inflate them away in a crisis. Caveat emptor.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Government bonds are both hedges and risky investments, offering insurance against flight-to-quality events while delivering returns as good as stocks from 1970 to 2000 in exchange for the gamble that the government will not inflate them away in a crisis.
  2. Prudent risk management should not ignore the possibility that the 2021–2023 inflation repeats, provoked by the next crisis or by the Fed's apparent return to 1978 monetary policy, just as 1979 followed 1975.
  3. Investors for whom inflation-induced losses coincide with particularly painful other events in their financial life should insist on a good deal more premium than those for whom they do not.

Related Articles:

  • Weaker Demand for Treasuries — Recent 10-year and 30-year US Treasury auctions each cleared three basis points above the yields trading minutes beforehand, signaling demand significantly weaker than the market expected. Larger and more frequent such gaps since the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates make auction metrics an early indicator of weakening Treasury demand.
  • Government Debt in Mature Economies. Safe or Risky? — When governments insulate taxpayers rather than bondholders from unfunded spending shocks, government bond yields rise as debt is marked to market, shifting the risk to bondholders — a "risky debt" regime the authors argue better fits recent experience. In that regime, large-scale central bank asset purchases give government bonds temporary price support at a net loss to taxpayers.
  • Fiscal Influences on Inflation in OECD Countries, 2020-2022 — Across 21 economies, the authors find that headline and core inflation responded positively to a measure of government spending increases scaled by pre-pandemic debt-to-GDP and average debt duration. Estimated coefficients of 0.4–0.5 suggest 40–50% of the extra spending was financed through inflation, with the rest through conventional public finance.

AI Summary. Postings for software development jobs are down more than 30% from pre-pandemic levels, with tech companies shedding roughly 137,000 jobs, according to job-tracking sites. Firms have shifted from growth-at-all-costs and moonshot projects toward revenue-generating products, artificial intelligence investment, and greater use of consultants and outsourced roles.

Katherine Bindley and Joseph Pisani Wall Street Journal
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

US tech firms have shed about 137,000 jobs since January 2024 and software development job postings are down 30% from the start of 2020, as companies focus on revenue-generating products and services, and rely more heavily on global talent.

Why have tech job postings dried up?

Core argument: Postings for software development jobs are down more than 30% since February 2020, according to Indeed.com, while tech companies have shed around 137,000 jobs since January, according to Layoffs.fyi.

Postings for software development jobs are down more than 30% since February 2020, according to Indeed.com. Industry layoffs have continued this year with tech companies shedding around 137,000 jobs since January, according to Layoffs.fyi. Company strategies are also shifting. Instead of growth at all costs and investment in moonshot projects, tech firms have become laser focused on revenue-generating products and services. At the same time, they started putting enormous resources into AI. The release of ChatGPT in late 2022 offered a glimpse into generative AI’s ability to create humanlike content and potentially transform industries. Workers with expertise in the field are among the few strong categories. [An unemployed tech recruiter] says most of the jobs he’s applying for are paying a third less than what they used to. What irks him is that tech companies have rebounded financially but some of them are relying on more consultants and are outsourcing roles. “Covid proved remote works, and now it’s opened up the job market for globalization in that sense,” he says.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Postings for software development jobs are down more than 30% since February 2020, according to Indeed.com, while tech companies have shed around 137,000 jobs since January, according to Layoffs.fyi.
  2. Tech firms have shifted from growth at all costs and moonshot projects toward revenue-generating products and services while pouring enormous resources into AI, leaving workers with AI expertise among the few strong hiring categories.
  3. An unemployed tech recruiter says most jobs he applies for pay a third less than they used to, and that tech companies have rebounded financially while relying more on consultants and outsourcing roles.

Related Articles:

  • Society’s Technical Debt and Software’s Gutenberg Moment — Every wave of technological innovation has been unleashed by something costly becoming cheap enough to waste, and large language models are collapsing the cost and complexity of producing software. The authors argue that decades of underproduced software have left society with immense technical debt that is poised to contract, releasing a wave of innovation.
  • Centaurs and Cyborgs on the Jagged Frontier — In a pre-registered experiment at Boston Consulting Group covering 18 realistic consulting tasks, consultants using ChatGPT-4 completed 12.2% more tasks, worked 25.1% faster, and produced 40% higher quality results than those without it. The tool acted as a skill leveler: the lowest-scoring consultants improved 43%, while top performers gained less.
  • A Severe Case of COVIDIA: Prognosis For An AI-Driven US Equity Market — Computing cycles move from infrastructure to platforms to applications, and NVIDIA data center revenues as a share of market-wide capital spending are projected to reach levels last seen at the 1969 mainframe peak and the dot-com boom. Large cloud providers spend more than twice as much training foundational models as running them for customers.

AI Summary. Across the developed world, the share of young men neither in education, employment, nor seeking work has climbed steadily for decades, and in the UK, France, Spain, and Canada young men now outnumber young women outside the economy for the first time. Over 80% of this group in the UK report long-term health problems.

John Burn-Murdoch Financial Times
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

.@jburnmurdoch finds that across multiple developed countries “there are more young men than women in effect outside the economy for the first time in history,” neither employed, looking for work, or in education.

Are young men now outnumbering young women outside the economy?

Core argument: More than 80% of young men in the UK who are neither in education, in work, nor looking for a job report long-term health problems.

Across the developed world, the portion of young men who are neither in education, in work nor looking for a job has been climbing steadily for decades. In countries including the UK, France, Spain, and Canada there are now more young men than women in effect outside the economy for the first time in history. Unlike young women, these men are generally not occupied by caring for other family members either. They are adrift and likely to be the ones in need of care themselves. More than 80% of this group in the UK report long-term health problems.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. More than 80% of young men in the UK who are neither in education, in work, nor looking for a job report long-term health problems.
  2. In the UK, France, Spain, and Canada, more young men than young women are now in effect outside the economy for the first time in history.
  3. The share of young men across the developed world who are neither in education, in work, nor seeking work has climbed steadily for decades, and unlike young women, these men are generally not caring for family members.

Related Articles:

  • Post-Pandemic Recovery for America’s Prime Age Labor Force: A Tale of Two Sexes — Prime-age women's labor force participation climbed about 5 points above its pre-pandemic level over a decade, while prime-age men's rose barely a point, only just regaining pre-pandemic levels. Despite economic expansion and labor shortages, work rates for prime-age American men are barely as high as at the trough of the severe Reagan-era recession.
  • Many Gen Z Men Feel Left Behind. Some See Trump As An Answer — National polling shows a gender gap of roughly 39 to 51 percentage points among voters under 30, with young men favoring the Republican candidate and young women favoring the Democrat. The Republican message resonates particularly with young men without college degrees and young men of color.
  • One Cohort at a Time: A New Perspective on the Declining Gender Pay Gap — The authors find the entire decline in the gender pay gap comes from newer cohorts entering with smaller-than-average gaps and older cohorts exiting with larger ones, with entry convergence driven by younger men's positional losses in the wage distribution, especially at higher-paying firms. They find labor-market exit became the sole contributor, implying no full convergence ahead.

AI Summary. A US bird flu infection in a person with no known contact with animal carriers, alongside illness in two close contacts, has left researchers awaiting data to determine whether human-to-human transmission has emerged. Gaps in surveillance persist because some states do not require farmers to test dairy cattle for the virus.

Heidi Ledford Nature
Date Posted:

A recent H5N1 case in Missouri may be the 1st US human infection that was not traced back to contact with infected animals, raising “the possibility that the virus might have evolved to not only infect humans but also to spread between people.”

Do surveillance gaps obscure whether bird flu spreads between people?

Core argument: The CDC announced on 13 September that two people in close contact with a hospitalized Missouri bird flu patient also became ill around the same time, raising concerns about human-to-human transmission.

All eyes are on Missouri. Researchers are anxiously awaiting data from the midwestern state about a mysterious bird flu infection in a person who had no known contact with potential animal carriers of the disease. The data could reveal whether the ongoing US bird flu outbreak in dairy cattle has reached a dreaded turning point: the emergence of a virus capable of spreading from human to human. Concerns were raised about the Missouri case on 13 September, when the CDC announced that two people who had close contact with the hospitalized person had also become ill around the same time. Ratcheting up concerns is the fact that no Missouri dairy farms have reported a bird flu outbreak; this might be because there really are no infections, or because the state does not require farmers to test their cows for the virus. “The fear is that the virus is spreading within the community at low levels, and this is the first time that we’re detecting it,” says Scott Hensley, a viral immunologist at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine in Philadelphia. “There’s no data to suggest that to be the case, but that’s the fear.”

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The CDC announced on 13 September that two people in close contact with a hospitalized Missouri bird flu patient also became ill around the same time, raising concerns about human-to-human transmission.
  2. The Missouri patient had no known contact with potential animal carriers, and no Missouri dairy farms have reported a bird flu outbreak, though the state does not require farmers to test cows for the virus.
  3. Scott Hensley, a viral immunologist at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, says the fear is that the virus is spreading within the community at low levels and is only now being detected, though no data suggest that.

Related Articles:

  • US Has Worst Bird Flu Outbreak in Two Years at Iowa Egg Farm — Bird flu was detected in an Iowa egg-laying flock of 4.2m birds, the largest US outbreak since 2022, in a state that produces nearly 12% of the country's layer hens according to the US Department of Agriculture. The virus has also been infecting dairy cows across the US.
  • Bird Flu Is Infecting More Mammals. What Does That Mean for Us? — The H5N1 bird flu strain now circulating globally has spread not only among farmed and wild birds but into many other animals, unlike earlier versions of the virus. Outbreaks in mink and in South American sea mammals suggest the virus most likely adapted to spread between mammals.
  • How the Current Bird Flu Strain Evolved to be so Deadly — A Nature study tracking bird flu genome changes and reported outbreaks found the virus spread three times faster among wild birds than farmed poultry, attributed to mutations letting it adapt to diverse species. Outbreaks, once seasonal with Northern Hemisphere bird migration, have become persistent, killing millions of birds across five continents.

AI Summary. The Silver Bulletin presidential election forecast shows the race as a toss-up near 50/50, with strong state polls for Kamala Harris making her a technical favorite in the model. The forecast's leader shifts frequently when the model sits this close to even odds.

Nate Silver and Eli McKown-Dawson Silver Bulletin
Date Posted:

The latest @NateSilver538 update shows Harris leading in the national popular vote by 2.8pp. His model shows a 51.1% probability of her winning the electoral college, up from ~ 40% prior to last week’s debate.

Is the presidential race a toss-up despite a technical favorite?

Core argument: Kamala Harris is technically the favorite in the Silver Bulletin forecast for the first time since Aug. 28, the 3rd time the forecast's streams have crossed during the election.

The theme of the week remains mostly strong state polls for Kamala Harris, like this batch from Morning Consult, which helped her even though Morning Consult has consistently shown some of her better numbers. Indeed, today marks the 3rd time so far in the election that the streams have crossed in the forecast — Harris is technically the favorite in the model for the first time since Aug. 28 — but the race is a toss-up and that will happen a lot when the forecast is so close to 50/50.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Kamala Harris is technically the favorite in the Silver Bulletin forecast for the first time since Aug. 28, the 3rd time the forecast's streams have crossed during the election.
  2. Strong state polls for Harris, including a batch from Morning Consult, helped her in the Silver Bulletin model, though Morning Consult has consistently shown some of her better numbers.
  3. Silver Bulletin characterizes the presidential race as a toss-up, noting that lead changes will occur often when the forecast sits so close to 50/50.

Related Articles: