On his way to becoming the president-elect of the United States, Donald Trump resolved to fix issues ranging from national security to economic growth. As part of his campaign, Trump proposed a 100-Day Plan that included “seven actions to protect American workers” from, among other things, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, currency manipulation, and energy drilling restrictions.
What’s the difference between an “undocumented worker” and an “illegal alien”? If this sounds like the setup for a groan-worthy political joke, it is—in a sense.
How to Talk Like a Democrat (or a Republican)
Are expectations about Trump's policies contributing to higher stock prices?
What Economists Think about the Post-election Stock RallyWhile millions of voters were receptive to Trump’s vision, leading economists, polled by Chicago Booth’s Initiative on Global Markets as part of its Economic Experts Panel, overwhelmingly disagree with his seven-point plan.
Barry Eichengreen, UC Berkeley
“Short-term fiscal stimulus will be a plus for the middle class, but then the negatives (investor uncertainty, inequality, geopolitical risk) will dominate.”
Response: Disagree
Christopher Udry, Yale
“These seven actions are symbolism (5, 6), actions with trivial immediate but disastrous long-run consequences (7), or threats of trade war (1-4).”
Response: Strongly Disagree
Daron Acemoglu, MIT
“Increased infrastructure spending could help construction, but the overall plan won’t help workers and will likely reduce medium term growth.”
Response: Disagree
David Autor, MIT
“Policies that raise import prices, deregulate dirty industries, and launch big infrastructure projects will boost non-college wages and jobs.”
Response: Agree
José Scheinkman, Princeton
“Most low-skilled workers would be hurt by higher cost of imports, disruption of global supply chains caused by tariffs and retaliations.”
Response: Strongly Disagree
To assess the extent to which economists agree or disagree on major public policy issues, Booth’s Initiative on Global Markets has assembled and regularly polls a diverse panel of expert economists, all senior faculty at the most elite research universities in the United States. The panel includes Nobel laureates and John Bates Clark medalists, among others. Questions are emailed individually to the panel members, and panelists may consult whatever resources they like before answering. Members of the public are free to suggest questions.
Two panels of economic experts consider the disparate career impact of bearing and rearing children.
What Drives Gender Gaps at Work?
Three experts discuss the sources of income inequality.
Why Are the Very Rich Getting Even Richer?
Findings from a series of surveys suggest that simple gender preference may be the explanation.
Some Fathers Are Less Willing to Spend on Daughters than on SonsYour Privacy
We want to demonstrate our commitment to your privacy. Please review Chicago Booth's privacy notice, which provides information explaining how and why we collect particular information when you visit our website.