Prof G Markets Trump’s $2,000 Tariff Dividend Doesn’t Add Up — Here’s Why
136 snips
Nov 12, 2025 
Justin Wolfers, a Professor of Economics at the University of Michigan, dissects Trump's proposed $2,000 tariff dividend, revealing its misleading nature and the misconception surrounding who pays tariffs. He argues it’s economically illogical, critiquing the lack of White House analysis. Alex Heath, a technology journalist, shifts the focus to the competitive dynamics between OpenAI and Anthropic, discussing their differing business strategies. With rising investor concerns over AI spending, Anthropic's cautious approach could position it as a future leader over its more aggressive rival.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Tariff Dividend Lacks Economic Logic
- Justin Wolfers calls the $2,000 tariff dividend economically incoherent and politically performative.
- He argues tariffs are consumption taxes that harm work and welfare while rebate plans fail to justify the added deadweight costs.
Policy Needs Rigorous Analysis And Transparency
- Wolfers criticizes the White House for skipping standard policy analysis and transparency.
- He emphasizes officials should publish modeling and show their work before proposing major economic changes.
Tariff Revenue Falls Far Short
- Wolfers estimates current tariff receipts at $20–25 billion monthly and flags a huge shortfall versus the proposed $600B dividend.
- He notes the math shows tariffs raise only ~$250–300B, so the proposal doesn't add up.