Capitalisn't

Economic models have treated the labor market like a perfectly competitive system where wages naturally align with worker value. Arin Dube, economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and author of “The Wage Standard”, challenges this long-held assumption. He argues that modern labor markets are riddled with invisible frictions that give employers outsized power over your paycheck. 

These uneven power dynamics help explain why salaries at the bottom of the distribution have historically stagnated while the broader economy grew. Dube unpacks decades of data to show what actually happens when minimum wages rise, pushing back against the classic warning that wage floors automatically destroy jobs. Instead, he presents evidence suggesting that higher pay can actually reduce turnover and push workers toward more productive companies. 

Hosts Luigi Zingales and Bethany McLean press Dube on the missing pieces of his labor puzzle. Zingales questions whether Dube is ignoring the massive impact of immigration on the supply and demand for low-wage labor. Meanwhile, McLean digs into the elusive concept of fairness, asking whether outsourced corporate janitors should compare their pay to Wall Street bankers or just to other janitors. 

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Follow Capitalisn’t on Instagram & TikTok

Send us your questions or comments by emailing [email protected]

You can find Arin Dube's book "The Wage Standard" here

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Most people associate Adam Smith with free markets and “the invisible hand”. But does this conventional narrative purposefully ignore Smith’s deep suspicions about monopolies and power? 

Georgetown assistant professor Glory Liu argues this narrow interpretation is actually a deliberate historical reconstruction. In her book, “Adam Smith’s America”, Liu reintroduces the famous philosopher as a theorist of power who worried deeply about organized wealth distorting society. She notes that Smith watched early merchants use their disproportionate resources to capture political influence and actively suppress workers. 

Hosts Luigi and Bethany debate whether early merchant wealth accumulation truly mirrors the massive capital concentration seen in today's corporate landscape. They also explore the argument that reintroducing moral foundations to economic theory might provide a better foundation for capitalism itself.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Follow Capitalisn’t on Instagram & TikTok

Send us your questions or comments by emailing [email protected] 

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We tend to view technological advancement as an unstoppable force that naturally improves our living standards over time. From the printing press to the internet, modern society assumes that groundbreaking ideas will always find their way into the marketplace. However, beneath the surface of our rapid digital expansion, global productivity is actually facing a troubling and persistent slowdown. Many people are beginning to wonder if our relentless push forward is practically sustainable or if we could be approaching a sudden halt.

In this episode, Oxford Professor Carl Frey joins the podcast to share the unsettling message of his new book, “How Progress Ends”. He argues that technological progress is far from inevitable and can easily reverse when entrenched institutions block new ideas from transforming society. Frey explores the historical tension between decentralized innovation and centralized bureaucracies, suggesting that both the United States and China might be heading toward a period of stagnation. Instead of a guaranteed bright future fueled by artificial intelligence, we face a reality where corporate power and political self-preservation could permanently trap us in the status quo.

This conversation digs into whether our modern institutions are robust enough to foster the next wave of human ingenuity or if they are fundamentally designed to suppress it. Listeners will discover exactly how historical empires have stifled their own growth and why those same warning signs are flashing today. 

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Follow Capitalisn’t on Instagram & TikTok

Send us your questions or comments by emailing [email protected] 

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

For decades, Americans viewed the Supreme Court as an impartial referee standing above the political fray. However, public trust in this vital institution has recently plummeted to historic lows. Many observers blame a surge in ideological rulings that align with the party of the President who appointed each justice. If the referee is suddenly wearing a team jersey, the fundamental systems of democracy and capitalism begin to break down.

Georgetown University Law Professor Steve Vladeck joins Luigi and Bethany to argue that the real culprit isn't just partisan justices, but a complete abdication of responsibility by Congress. Rather than viewing judicial reform as a zero-sum game of packing the court, he proposes that lawmakers must reclaim their constitutional authority to check judicial overreach. He explains how special interest groups have successfully manipulated this power vacuum to reshape American regulations. This perspective completely reframes the crisis from a partisan dispute into a structural collapse of institutional power.

This episode explores the hidden mechanisms that allow unaccountable judges to unilaterally rewrite the rules of our economic system, why decades of political complacency allowed this shift and what actionable steps can actually fix it. Vladeck answers whether the business community will ultimately regret enabling a system that erodes the reliable rule of law and why saving our markets may require Congress to finally stand up and do its job.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Follow Capitalisn’t on Instagram & TikTok

Send us your questions or comments by emailing [email protected] 

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As we approach the 250th anniversary of Adam Smith's “Wealth of Nations" this March, his theories on competition and the invisible hand remain part of the bedrock of modern economics. But, have we undermined those theories in our economy today?

Widespread public anger suggests there is a growing belief that our current economic system is fundamentally rigged by those at the top. In many instances, backroom access and elite networking appear to be driving who becomes wealthy and successful instead of meritocratic competition. What would the father of economics think about today's crony capitalism, and what would he make of the so-called "Epstein class"?

In this episode, we are joined by British Member of Parliament and author of “Adam Smith: Father of Economics” Jesse Norman. He argues that people often forget Smith deeply distrusted concentrated power, highlighting that Smith was heavily critical of wealth generated from insider knowledge or collusion. Smith condemned these practices precisely because they destroy the genuine competition required for free markets to actually benefit society.

Applying this historical lens to current events, co-host Luigi Zingales provocatively asks if the so-called “Epstein Class” embody Adam Smith’s worst fears, coordinating favors to bypass free market competition. Co-host Bethany McLeans debates whether we should call it a class, or if fixating on Epstein is a distraction from the broader systemic corruption threatening capitalism today.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Follow Capitalisn’t on Instagram & TikTok

Send us your questions or comments by emailing [email protected] 

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.