Summary of "Q&A Part 2: Working Two Jobs, Incentives vs. Handouts, the Gold Standard, and Government ROI"

Optimist Economy Podcast
Hosts: Kathryn Anne Edwards and Robin Rauzi
Release Date: July 31, 2025

In this second installment of their Q&A series, Kathryn Anne Edwards and Robin Rauzi tackle a range of listener-submitted questions that delve into the intricacies of the U.S. economy. The episode covers topics such as the implications of abandoning the gold standard, the challenges of working multiple jobs under new labor regulations, the power dynamics within the labor market, and evaluating government initiatives based on return on investment (ROI).

1. The Gold Standard: Abandonment and Its Consequences

Listener Question:
Navid from San Diego asks, “Does it actually matter that America has abandoned the gold standard? Is there real evidence that leaving the gold standard has had negative economic consequences? Or is this a bunch of nonsense being pushed by the descendants of the John Birch Society? Would there be any benefit to returning to some version of the gold standard?”
Timestamp: [01:15]

Kathryn's Response:
Kathryn asserts that abandoning the gold standard has been beneficial for the U.S. economy. She explains that while there are trade-offs and certain limitations that come with moving away from gold, the significant advantage lies in the ability to implement an independent monetary policy not constrained by gold reserves. This flexibility allows the Federal Reserve to manage the money supply more effectively, fostering economic stability and growth.

Notable Quote:
"The real value to having a Federal Reserve is independent in overseeing the money supply."
— Kathryn [01:41]

She references the book "Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World" to illustrate how the gold standard historically hampered economic recovery during crises, such as World War I. Kathryn concludes that returning to the gold standard would limit the government's ability to respond dynamically to economic challenges.

2. Unintended Consequences of the 30-Hour Work Week Cap

Listener Question:
Pamela Gordon from San Jose, California voices concerns about the unintended consequences of capping the work week at 30 hours. She mentions that some companies reduce employee hours to avoid providing benefits, forcing workers to take on multiple part-time jobs.
Timestamp: [04:21]

Kathryn's Response:
Kathryn critiques the practice of employers minimizing work hours to circumvent benefit obligations, labeling it as "petty." She challenges the broader system where essential benefits like health insurance are tied to employment, arguing that this creates a gatekeeping mechanism that can exploit workers. Kathryn advocates for stronger worker protections, such as a higher minimum wage and policies that increase competition in the labor market to prevent employers from having excessive power over employees.

Notable Quote:
"Because the idea of perfect competition... when you have perfect competition between firms and workers, you're gonna be paid what you're owed."
— Kathryn [11:53]

She emphasizes that enhancing competition among employers and implementing robust wage laws can mitigate the power imbalance currently favoring employers, thereby ensuring fair compensation and reducing the need for multiple jobs.

3. Labor Market Power Imbalances and Worker Mobility

Listener Question:
Paul Wilk questions the power imbalance in the labor market, pondering whether universal basic income (UBI) could serve as a solution without discouraging work.
Timestamp: [08:16]

Kathryn's Response:
Kathryn explains that power imbalances arise when workers have limited outside options, reducing their bargaining power. She highlights the importance of worker mobility—the ability to move between jobs—as a critical factor in maintaining this balance. Kathryn suggests that increasing competition among employers, banning non-compete agreements, and preventing wage suppression through employer collusion are essential steps to empower workers.

Notable Quote:
"Mobility is everything for a worker. You have to be able to pack up and leave, take this job and shove it and go somewhere else."
— Kathryn [13:02]

She advocates for policies that enhance worker mobility, such as expanding access to the internet for job searching and enforcing antitrust laws to prevent employer monopolies that restrict labor market options.

Additional Insights:
Kathryn and Robin discuss the decline in worker mobility over recent decades, attributing it to factors like increased housing costs and reduced willingness to relocate. Kathryn also touches on the complexities of unemployment insurance and its role in either creating incentives or mitigating barriers for workers seeking better employment opportunities.

4. Evaluating Federal Agencies Through ROI

Listener Question:
Amir Bafroy from Houston, Texas asks, “How would you determine what federal agencies or grantees provide the federal government with the most ROI? How would you determine what federal agencies, programs, or grantees provide the most ROI to the government?”
Timestamp: [21:03]

Kathryn's Response:
Kathryn challenges the application of ROI as a metric for evaluating federal agencies, arguing that the government’s objectives often extend beyond financial returns. She provides the example of AmeriCorps, highlighting its low operational costs and significant societal benefits despite not generating direct financial profits. Kathryn emphasizes that government programs should be assessed based on their ability to serve public needs and improve citizen welfare rather than strictly financial ROI.

Notable Quote:
"What makes an economist conservative or liberal... same thing with like this incentive of like, do you write them a check... I'd take it. I'll take it 10 days a week."
— Kathryn [20:25]

She critiques the over-reliance on ROI metrics in the public sector, advocating for evaluations that prioritize service quality and long-term societal benefits over short-term financial gains.

Additional Insights:
Kathryn discusses the inefficiencies within federal agencies, attributing them to legislative shortcomings and bureaucratic redundancies. She calls for comprehensive government reform focused on enhancing service delivery and career satisfaction for federal employees, rather than solely on financial metrics.

5. Closing Thoughts and Spiritual Sponsors

As the episode wraps up, Kathryn and Robin share their "spiritual sponsors," personal elements that provide them with grounding and inspiration.

Kathryn:
Expresses her affection for her dog, describing how her pet's behavior on the couch serves as her spiritual sponsor.
Timestamp: [28:25]

Robin:
Humorously cites "improvised yoga pose names" as her spiritual sponsor, sharing anecdotes about the whimsical names her son assigns to yoga poses.
Timestamp: [30:18]

Conclusion

This episode of Optimist Economy offers insightful discussions on pivotal economic issues facing the United States. Kathryn Anne Edwards and Robin Rauzi provide expert analysis on historical economic policies, labor market dynamics, and the effectiveness of government programs. Their thoughtful responses underscore the importance of policy reforms aimed at enhancing worker protections, increasing market competition, and re-evaluating government evaluation metrics to better serve public interests.