Building Tomorrow

Economist Alexander Tabarrok discusses the Baumol effect and how it disrupts our ideas about effective government policies. They explore the rising prices in education and healthcare, the impact of AI and automation, and the ethical obligation to pursue growth in labor productivity. The podcast highlights the benefits of technological innovation for non-tech workers.

As the threat of government regulation of the internet mounts from both the political Left and Right, Paul and Matthew sit down to talk about the foundational law that made the internet as we know it possible. Ironically, Section 230 was one of the few bits of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that wasn’t struck down by the courts as a violation of the First Amendment, giving the internet more legal protection than it would have if the moral scolds of the 1990s hadn’t passed the law in the first place. Then, Paul talks with Jennifer Huddleston from the Mercatus Center about her research into the common law origins of Section 230, which rebuts claims that the amendment was some kind of unprecedented “gift” to tech companies.What was the primary purpose of the Communications Decency Act? What are the ramifications of Section 230? Without Section 230, what would the internet look like? Why is censorship important to the conservative movement?Further Reading:What Senator Hawley Gets Wrong about American Identity, written by Aaron Ross PowellSection 230 Is the Internet’s First Amendment. Now Both Republicans and Democrats Want To Take It Away, written by Elizabeth Nolan BrownWhat Republicans are getting wrong about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, written by Zachary MackRelated Content:Free Speech Online: Unfriended, Building Tomorrow PodcastHow the FOSTA Rules Create a “Bootleggers and Baptists” Scenario for the 21st Century, written by Paul MatzkoNew Conspiracism and Modern Politics (with Russell Muirhead), Free Thoughts Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Parenting is a wonderful, terrifying, joyful, horrible, lovely thing. And one of the more annoying aspects is the firehose-worth deluge of information about what you should and should not do with your children, the thousands of books, websites, and expert all clamoring with advice. Emily Oster, best-selling author of Cribsheet, offers a way to wade through the often contradictory advice without losing your mind. In short, she’ll teach you how to approach parenting like an economist and data scientist.How do parents making parenting decisions based off of data? How important is data in parenting decisions? Is anyone an actual parenting expert? Why are infant mortality rates so much higher in the U.S. compared to other developed countries?Further Reading:Cribsheet: A Data-Driven Guide to Better, More Relaxed Parenting, from Birth to Preschool, written by Emily OsterExpecting Better: Why the Conventional Pregnancy Wisdom Is Wrong—and What You Really Need to Know, written by Emily OsterEconomist Emily Oster explains the science of parenting, written by Angela ChenRelated Content:Overparenting & Bad Public Policy, Free Thoughts PodcastWhy Schools Haven’t Changed in Hundreds of Years, Free Thoughts PodcastThe Best Work/Family Arrangements Come from Families, Not Governments, written by Steven Horwitz Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Facebook and a coalition of major tech and financial companies are planning on creating a new crypto-currency called Libra that promises to make online payment processing swifter, safer, and less expensive. Diego Zuluaga joins Paul to discuss how Libra differs from other crypto-currencies and to provide some calm, rational analysis about a topic that has provoked intense knee-jerk reactions.What is Libra? What are the constitutional behaviors of Libra? What is Libra’s structure of governance? How do you switch from U.S. dollars and your Libra account? How can Libra help you send money to your families in other countries? How will Libra be regulated?Further Reading:Of Libras and Zebras: What Are the True Financial Risks of the Facebook-led Digital Currency (Part I: Systemic Risk), written by Diego ZuluagaFacebook’s Libra Is Part of a Welcome Trend, written by Diego ZuluagaFacebook has a second chance to sell Libra on Capitol Hill today, written by Clare DuffyRelated Content:What’s in Your (Crypto) Wallet?, Building Tomorrow PodcastHow a Honey Bear Is Reinvigorating Cryptocurrency Mining, written by Spencer NealeDecentralization and Privacy Are Inevitable — in Tech and in Government, written by Aaron Ross Powell Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As recent scandals on social media platforms have shown, content moderation is hard, thankless work. The lines between political satire, hate speech, historical documentation, and obscenity get blurry very quickly even in a single country, let alone when trying to create a one-size-fits-all global moderation standard. Companies like Facebook and Twitter are attempting to routinize their content moderation processes, but Matthew and Paul discuss whether those efforts—however well-intentioned—are too little, too late.What happened between Crowder and Maza? What debates are happening in the tech space about content moderation? How do we determine hate? How does Facebook respond to questionable content? What is too radical to be posted online? What are the limits to hate speech?Further Reading:YouTube’s week from hell: How the debate over free speech online exploded after a conservative star with millions of subscribers was accused of homophobic harassment, written by Benjamin Goggin.Where’s the Real Harm from Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple?, written by Ryan BourneRelated Content:Free Speech Online: Unfriended, Building Tomorrow PodcastSpeech Police, Building Tomorrow PodcastPractical Problems with Regulating Tech in the Public Interest, written by Will Rinehart Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It is an accident of history that so many tech and social media companies are based in the United States. For example, Facebook has several times more users than there are citizens of any nation in the world. Thus, when a company like Facebook sets rules for content moderation of things like hate speech and pornography, it has truly global implications. David Kaye, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, joins the show to argue that supranational tech companies should adopt supranational standards for content moderation, namely the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with hopes that doing so will constrain governments from limiting basic speech rights.What is the interaction between surveillance and free speech? What is the digital access industry & what role do they play? Is there a tolerable censorship? What is the Google Spain, “right to be forgotten” case? How do we think of democratization of social media platforms? What is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?Further Reading:Speech Police: The Global Struggle to Govern the Internet, written by David KayeMr. David Kaye, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Press Release from the United NationsUN Expert: Content moderation should not trample free speech, written by David KayeRelated Content:Free Speech Online: Unfriended, Free Thoughts PodcastToward an Uncensored Internet, written by Sonya MannThe Brazilian People Reject Censorship, written by Mauricio F. Bento Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

HBO’s show about the Chernobyl nuclear plant disaster is the highest rated show on IMDB of all time in part because of its ability to make otherwise dull topics—meetings, shoveling, courtroom exposition—riveting. To suss out fact from fiction, Paul and Matthew invited Matt Crozat from the Nuclear Energy Institute to discuss the show’s portrayal, the history of nuclear plant disasters—including Three Mile Island and Fukushima—and the future of the nuclear energy in America and around the world.How accurate was the HBO show Chernobyl? Why was Chernobyl so catastrophic? What is considered a high radiation level? Should we be optimistic about nuclear power? Have we come a long way since Chernobyl? How is Chernobyl a story about toxic leadership?Further Reading:Why HBO’s “Chernobyl” Gets Nuclear So Wrong, written by Michael ShellenbergerChernobyl and the dangerous ground of ‘dark tourism’, written by Francesca StreetPhotographs capture an abandoned world inside the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, written by Oscar HollandRelated Content:The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, Free Thoughts PodcastA Libertarian Approach to the Green New Deal, Building Tomorrow PodcastCapitalism Can Save the Environment, Free Thoughts Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

More than 48 billion robocalls bombard American phones each year, taking the ‘phone’ out of ‘smartphone’ for many consumers. Yet while the problem has drastically worsened over the past several years, there may be hope on the horizon. Private, third party companies are giving consumers ways to divert or even combat robocalls. And the FCC has finally cleared up the regulatory confusion that contributed to phone carrier reluctance to directly address the problem themselves. We can hope that in ten years, the robocall scourge will seem as quaint as worries about spam email do today, despite being just as seemingly intractable an issue in the 1990s.What is spoofing? What is audio fingerprinting? Why don’t cell phone carriers prevent robocalls? How serious is the problem of spam calls? How has email spam become more manageable? How did email change the world?Further Reading:Why Robocalls Are Even Worse Than You Thought, written by Tim HarperRobocalls are overwhelming hospitals and patients, threatening a new kind of health crisis, written by Tony RommRoboKiller AppHow to Stop Robocalls— Or At Least Slow Them Down, written by Lily Hay NewmanRelated Content:Practical Problems with Regulating Tech in the Public Interest, written by Will RinehartThe Social Consequences of Multilevel Marketing, written by Pamela J. HobartHas Your Phone Hacked Your Brain, Building Tomorrow Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How will people respond to artificial intelligence taking their jobs? The rise of political radicalism on both Left and Right in the early twenty-first century is in part a reaction to rising income inequality and slower wage growth despite the increasing automation of jobs and gains in productive efficiency. We are in an ‘Engels pause,’ the lag between new technology that benefits whole economies and the moment those gains filter down to the families of displaced workers. Something similar happened during the industrial revolution during the 19th century, the moment that birthed Marxism. Paul interviews economic historian Carl Frey to discuss what we can learn about our present moment of technological innovation and the social reaction to it from the history of industrialization.What is the technology trap? Why didn’t the industrial revolution happen earlier? Who are the beneficiaries of technological progress? Can algorithms be creative? What is the difference between originality and creativity?Further Reading:The Technology Trap: Capital, Labor, and the Power in the Age of Automation, written by Carl Benefikt FreyEngel’s Pause: A Pessimist’s Guide to the British Industrial Revolution, written by Robert Allen and Robert C. AllenCapital in the Twenty-First Century, written by Thomas PikettyRelated Content:Industrial Revolution, written by Deirdre McCloskeyWill Artificial Intelligence Take Your Job?, Building Tomorrow PodcastWill Algorithms Replace the Price System?, written by Adam Gurri Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The gig economy is transforming cities. Companies like Uber, Lyft, Airbnb, and TaskRabbit are hiring thousands of workers on a contract basis rather than as formal employees, a legal distinction with broad implications for both workers and the future of the American economy. Matthew and Paul discuss the reasoning behind the contractor classification and whether it will be a net benefit to gig economy workers. They also talk about smart policy fixes—including expanded access to portable health insurance and various benefits-focused startups—that can address the downsides of contingent labor.What is the gig economy and how is it different than the regular economy? What is rent-seeking behavior and how is it threatening the gig economy? What is the best interests of consumers? What is the precautionary principle?Further Reading:New Employment Regulations Could Destroy California’s Gig Economy, written by Christian BritschgiGig workers are fighting to be classified as employees. Trump’s Labor Department just came out against this., written by Chavie LieberThe Truth About the Gig Economy, written by Annie LowreyRelated Content:On Innovation: Don’t Ask for Permission, Building Tomorrow PodcastWelcome to the Sharing Economy, Free Thoughts PodcastRide-Sharing Services Aren’t a Problem, They’re a Solution, written by Aeon Skoble Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.