Plain English with Derek Thompson

I'm very concerned about the relationship between smartphone use and America's mental health crisis. But many researchers don't see things my way. They insist that there is little to no empirical data showing that smartphone and social media use drives up anxiety or depression. So what’s the truth about smartphones, social media, and mental health? That’s the question that the NYU researcher Jay Van Bavel set out to answer with his collaborator Valerio Capraro. They took dozens of claims about smartphones, sent them to hundreds of experts in the field, and asked them if these claims were probably true, probably false, or unknown—and why. The result was a massive survey, one of the largest of its kind in the history of psychology. Today, Van Bavel joins the show to tell us what he found, what surprised him, and why his consensus survey made so many researchers so angry. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Jay Van Bavel Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In November 1932, Germany was a republic. By the spring of 1933, it was a dictatorship. How did it all happen so quickly? Fascination with Adolf Hitler requires no news peg, but I’ve been particularly interested in understanding the story of Hitler's rise, because in the past few months, several prominent podcast hosts—including Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson—have mainstreamed revisionist histories of the Nazi regime and WWII. These new histories often soften Hitler’s antisemitism and treat him as a man of limited ambition; a guy who just wanted to give Germans a bit more living room, who was pulled into a continental war by Winston Churchill. The best book that I’ve read that makes use of the trove of documentation on the subject is 'Hitler’s People,' by the historian Richard Evans, who is today's guest. Evans is the author of a famous three-volume history of Hitler—'The Coming of the Third Reich,' 'The Third Reich in Power,' and 'The Third Reich at War'_—_and he is widely considered the most comprehensive historian of Nazi Germany in the world. His new book distills his multi-thousand-page history into an elegant 100-page synthesis of Hitler’s life, followed by profiles of his most important advisers. The end of the book is particularly interesting, as it profiles ordinary Germans of the time, for the purpose of explaining how normal, non-psychopathic people found themselves involved in a regime so brutal that it’s become a synonym for evil. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Richard Evans Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The tax and spending bill passed by House Republicans last week is the sort of bill that does so many different things that even budget experts could be forgiven for not realizing just how many different parts of the economy it will change. In the realm of workers' comp, the bill would eliminate taxes on overtime pay and tips. In terms of families, it would create new $1,000 savings accounts for children and give parents an extra $500 per year per child, in the form of an expanded child tax credit. In the realm of health and the culture wars, it would ban the use of Medicaid funds for gender-affirming care and cut funding for Planned Parenthood. In the realm of climate, it would claw back half a trillion dollars of investments in wind, solar, geothermal, batteries, nuclear power, clean hydrogen, and electric vehicle purchases. In the realm of defense, it would increase spending by over $100 billion on shipbuilding, air and missile defense, immigration enforcement, and border security. But judging strictly by the sheer dollar amount of the provision, this bill is really about three big things. Number one, it extends a multitrillion-dollar tax cut on corporate and individual income. Number two, it reduces federal spending on two major government programs by a combined $1 trillion: Medicaid, the government health-care program for those with low income, and SNAP, or federal spending on food stamps. And number three, because of the mismatch I just told you about, between the tax cuts and the spending cuts, it will increase the national debt by several trillion dollars over the next 10 years. Today, we have two guests. First, the University of Chicago economist Eric Zwick joins to talk about the corporate tax cut. And second, to understand how to think about the debt picture, I talk to Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guests: Eric Zwick and Maya MacGuineas Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Last year, Kyle and Nicole Muldoon welcomed their baby KJ into the world. Almost immediately, doctors realized something was wrong. KJ had been born with a genetic mutation that made it impossible to regulate the amount of ammonia in his system. The rare disease had the potential to kill him or cause severe brain damage. But KJ is almost 10 months old today. And he’s doing better than ever. Because this little baby has become a piece of medical history: the first patient of any age to receive a personalized gene-editing treatment. It's truly remarkable. In the hundreds of years of modern science, no human being had ever received a medicine designed specifically to correct their genetic mutation. A medicine built for one. That is, until KJ Muldoon. Today, we have a very special guest: Dr. Kiran Musunuru, the gene-editing researcher at the University of Pennsylvania at the center of this breakthrough. We talk about the full story of saving baby KJ, what this breakthrough means for science, and what we need to learn or change to make personalized genetic medicine possible at a larger scale. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Dr. Kiran Musunuru Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Psychology is hard, even when you’re just trying to understand what’s going on with one impossibly complex person. Romance psychology is particularly hard because you’re trying to understand what’s going on between two impossibly complex people. Eli Finkel is a professor of psychology at Northwestern University. Paul Eastwick is a professor at the University of California, Davis. Both are experts on the psychology of attraction, dating, and romance and hosts of the Love Factually podcast. Today, Derek asks: Does anybody actually have "a type"? Are we any good at predicting the sort of people we’ll fall in love with? Has online dating caused people to over-filter for attraction, even though initial attraction doesn't determine long-term compatibility? How do modern, affluent folks' incredibly high expectations of marriage affect satisfaction in long-term relationships? If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guests: Eli Finkel and Paul Eastwick Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In every generation, important people predict that the end is near and the apocalypse is coming. In the 1960s, the fear was that population growth would destroy the planet—that fertility would outrun the food supply, and hundreds of millions of people would starve to death. The most famous warning was 'The Population Bomb,' a bestselling book published in 1968 by Stanford ecologist Paul Ehrlich, which claimed "the battle to feed all of humanity is over" and “hundreds of millions of people would starve to death” in the 1970s. But then the 1970s came and went. And global famine deaths didn’t rise. They declined by 90 percent. In the 1980s, deaths from world hunger fell again. And again in the 1990s. And again in the 2000s. The apocalypse that everybody said was coming never came. And the reason is, basically, we invented super wheat. In the 1950s and 1960s, a plant pathologist named Norman Borlaug, working in Mexico on fungus-resistant wheat on a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, managed to create a breed of wheat that was super abundant, efficient, and disease-resistant. His work kickstarted what’s known as the Green Revolution, a movement whose discoveries are responsible for keeping roughly half the planet alive. In 2007, when Borlaug was 93, The Wall Street Journal editorialized that he had “arguably saved more lives than anyone in history. Maybe one billion.” Today’s guest is Charles C. Mann, a journalist and author. We talk about the long history of the Green Revolution. Who was Norman Borlaug? What did he actually do? How did he do it? What does his accomplishment teach us about science, invention, and progress? We’re at a moment today when American science is being cut to the bone while foreign aid is being slashed. I sometimes hear the question: What is foreign aid really worth to us? I think it’s important to remember that Norman Borlaug was a foundation-funded scientist who didn’t do his most important work in air-conditioned labs at Harvard or Johns Hopkins. His breakthroughs came in lean-to shacks in Mexico, where he worked to improve harvests. Without Borlaug’s accomplishments, the world would look very different: Famines might trigger migration that destabilizes countries and transforms global politics. The world we have today, where countries like China and India can easily feed their huge populations, is a gift to global stability, to humanity, to America. It grew from the seed of a foreign agricultural support program. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Charles C. Mann Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On Monday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order telling drugmakers to slash the prices of their medicines. Once again, the president showed an amazing nose for interesting questions. Statistically, the U.S. accounts for 4 percent of the world’s population but nearly 50 percent of global pharmaceutical spending. Americans spend three to five times more on new branded drugs than people in Europe. Why? And what's the matter with fixing this problem by just telling pharmaceutical companies that their prices are too damn high? Today’s guest is Jason Abaluck, a health economist at Yale University. We talk about why Americans pay so much for new drugs but, ironically, pay so little for old drugs. We unpack trade-offs between low prices and innovation. And finally, we consider several ways we can have our cake and eat it too: more miracle drugs and more affordability. Because, after all, what is this whole conversation about besides the obvious: How do we design a world in which imperfect people working at imperfect companies nonetheless collaborate to build therapies that save and extend our lives with products we can actually afford? If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Jason Abaluck Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In music, billion-dollar investments in old catalogues are squeezing out new music. In film, Hollywood has become addicted to the regurgitation of familiar IP. In visual art, critics bemoan the straitjacket of political correctness. On TV, as Derek told Bill Simmons, we're in a Gilded Age of television, where every prestigious show looks absolutely amazing—but that gilded veneer often covers up for dull storytelling. What do these trends all have in common? The slow decline of modern media. This month, The Atlantic's Spencer Kornhaber published a blockbuster essay, "Is This the Worst-Ever Era of American Pop Culture?" Today, he joins Derek to answer that question. They discuss the four horsemen of the pop culture apocalypse—stagnation, cynicism, isolation, and brain rot—and the case that, maybe, things aren't quite as bad as they seem. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Spencer Kornhaber Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Last month, the unemployment rate for recent college grads surged to nearly 6 percent. Compared to the overall economy's jobless rate, the unemployment rate for recent grads is higher now than in any month on record, going back at least four decades. Business school grads are struggling, too. Last year, The Wall Street Journal reported that elite MBA programs saw that their most recent classes had "worse job-placement outcomes last year than any other in recent memory." What’s going on? Today’s guest is David Deming, an economist at Harvard who studies education and the future of work. We walk through some plain-Jane theories about the weakening labor market for young college grads. But then, as you’ll hear, the conversation expands to consider the coming storm of AI—and how artificial intelligence is changing education and the workforce for young people. To read more on this topic, check out Derek's Atlantic column from last week. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: David Deming Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today, we are witnessing an unprecedented assault on American science. Thousands of workers have been dismissed from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Billions of dollars are being cut from the NIH and NSF. Talented scientists are leaving the field (or leaving the country). Clinical trials and longitudinal studies are ending without explanation. Major research universities are under direct attack, with billions more dollars being withheld for political purposes. Today, I want to do three things: First, I want to review what's happening to American science and why it’s so serious. Second, I want to explore how we got here—how the American science system works, and where it came from. And third, I want to discuss what a real reformist agenda for American science would look like. So, for the first time, this is a triple-barreled podcast. First we speak to Holden Thorp, the editor-in-chief of Science and the prestigious Science journals. Second, we talk to Bhaven Sampat, a researcher and historian at Arizona State University, about the history of the NIH. And finally, we talk to Pierre Azoulay, a researcher at MIT, who has spent considerable time and energy studying how American science works and how it could work better. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guests: Holden Thorp, Bhaven Sampat and Pierre Azoulay Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the last few weeks, for the first time in my life, I’ve seriously thought about the 21st century not being another American century. A recent essay in the journal Foreign Affairs by Rush Doshi and Kurt Campbell put things as starkly as I’ve ever seen. Some people are still stuck in a mode of thinking about China as being a place that just makes things of little value and significance. But Made in China means something different now. Technologically, China dominates everything from electric vehicles to fourth-generation nuclear reactors. Militarily, it features the world’s largest navy. Its shipbuilding capacity is 200 times as large as America’s. In a world built of cement and steel, China makes 20 times more cement and 13 times more steel than the U.S. In a world whose future will be full of electric vehicles, batteries, drones, and solar power, China makes two-thirds of the world’s EVs, three-quarters of its electric batteries, 80 percent of consumer drones, and 90 percent of solar panels. In a world where wars are won by the largest militaries, consider that China’s navy will be 50 percent larger than the U.S. Navy by the end of the decade. Today's guests are Kurt Campbell and Rush Doshi. Both men served on the Biden National Security Council. Campbell is the chairman and cofounder of The Asia Group. Doshi is director of the China Strategy Initiative at the Council on Foreign Relations and an assistant professor at Georgetown University. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Kurt Campbell and Rush Doshi Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In 1937, a Rhode Island psychiatrist named Charles Bradley ran an experiment on 30 child patients who had complained of headaches. He gave them an amphetamine, that is a stimulant, called Benzedrine, which was popular at the time among jazz musicians and college students. The experiment failed, in one sense. The headaches persisted. But he noted that half of the children responded in what he called spectacular fashion, as teachers said these children seemed instantly transformed by the drug. Rather than being bored by their homework, they were interested in it. Rather than being hyperactive, they became more “placid and easygoing.” Rather than complaining to parents about chores, they would make comments like: “I start to make my bed, and before I know it, it is done.” Bradley published the results in The American Journal of Insanity, and it marks perhaps the origins of our treatment model for ADHD. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, has always been hard to define. It’s harder still in an age when everybody feels like modern entertainment and the omnipresence of our screens make it hard for anybody to concentrate and sit still. But clearly, some people struggle with concentration and stillness more than others. ADHD has many classic symptoms, but it is typically marked by patterns of inattentiveness—frequently losing items, failing to follow multistep instructions—or by hyperactivity: say, fidgeting, or, for some children, being literally incapable of sitting in one place for more than half a second. In a way, I’ve always disliked the phrase "attention-deficit disorder," because ADHD is not about a deficit of ordinary attention but a surplus of feral attention—an overflowing of raw, uncontrollable noticing. Last week, the journalist Paul Tough published a long, 9,000-word essay in The New York Times Magazine about ADHD called "Have We Been Thinking About ADHD All Wrong?" Tough asked hard questions about why diagnoses are soaring. Is this evidence of an epidemic? Or is it evidence of overdiagnosis? Paul is today’s guest. We talk about his blockbuster essay, what its loudest critics said about it, what its loudest advocates said about it, and why they both might be wrong. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Paul Tough Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Last week, a team of astrophysicists from the University of Cambridge announced that they had discovered the “strongest indication” ever of extraterrestrial life. The source did not come from Mars or Venus or any nearby moon. It came from K2-18b, a massive planet some 120 light-years from Earth. If this finding checks out, it is, without question, one of the most important discoveries in the history of science. But many scientists think that ... well, it might not check out at all. Today’s guest is Sara Seager, a celebrated astrophysicist at MIT. Seager is a pioneer in the study of exoplanets and their atmospheres. She has done as much as practically anybody to develop the science of interpreting light from faraway stars to make inferences about planets. In today’s show, Seager and I slowly worked our way up to last week’s announcement by building a foundation of the basic science at play. What are exoplanets? How do we know that they’re there? How do we have any idea about the chemicals present on that planet if we can’t send probes to test their air? What does the K2-18b finding really tell us? And what larger philosophical questions about life and aliens are raised by this new science of exoplanet atmospheres? If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Sara Seager Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the past three weeks, we've spoken to economists about the tariffs. We’ve spoken to a historian about the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and the 100-year legacy of American protectionism. We've spoken to supply chain expert Jason Miller from Michigan State about why China is set up to win the upcoming trade war. But the voice we haven’t heard is the voice of business. People who run companies are screaming at whoever will listen that the White House agenda will decimate business and plunge their industries into a recession. Today’s guest is Molson Hart. He’s run a manufacturing business in the U.S. for the last 15 years. His company, Viahart, manufactures consumer products in China, Indonesia, and Vietnam and sells them both in stores and online—mostly in the U.S. His biggest vertical is toys, including Brain Flakes, which are molded plastic disks that kids and adults can snap together to build things. This is not a bleeding-heart lefty. Quite the opposite: This is a guy who is rooting for the Trump agenda to succeed. This is a guy who told me in our interview he wants to believe that the Trump team has its heart in the right place when it comes to bringing back manufacturing in the long run. And yet he has called these tariffs not just a bad idea … but the worst economic policy in American history. I spoke to him this week, and he was just incredibly compelling and thoughtful about the toy industry, why it’s so difficult to bring back American manufacturing quickly, and how these tariffs could do incredible damage to America’s small businesses. So we’ve decided to rush out this interview a little sooner than we intended, in part because it’s great and in part because this news story is moving so quickly, it’s hard to know what reality will even look like next week. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Molson Hart Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The U.S. is in the opening innings of a full-blown trade war with China. What does that actually mean? What do we sell to China? What does China sell to us? How is each country dependent on the other for the supply of electronics, food, machines, and goods? Jason Miller, a professor at Michigan State and an expert on global supply chains, tells Derek that in the trade war between the U.S. and China, one of these two countries seems better positioned to weather a protracted trade dispute—and it’s not the U.S. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Jason Miller Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The 1920s and the 2020s share a special kinship. One hundred years ago, the U.S. was grappling with a mix of growth, technological splendor, and generational anxiety—a familiar cocktail (albeit, from an era where cocktails were illegal). The era’s young people felt uniquely besieged by global forces. “My whole generation is restless," F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote in This Side of Paradise. “A new generation dedicated more than the last to the fear of poverty and the worship of success; grown up to find all Gods dead, all wars fought, all faiths in man shaken." America was changing. And change always implies a kind of loss. We were moving toward cars and cities and manufacturing. And that meant we were moving away from horses and farmland and agriculture. And so, in 1930, just months into the Great Depression, Herbert Hoover signed a new piece of legislation to restore farmers to their previous glory. It was a great big tariff—the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. Rather than save the economy, it deepened the depression. Today, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff is one of the most infamous failures in the history of American politics. To suggest that it holds lessons for this moment in history is to state the obvious. Our guest is Douglas Irwin, an economist and historian at Dartmouth University and an expert on the economic debates of the Great Depression. We talk about the economic motivations of the Smoot-Hawley tariff, the congressional debates that shaped it, the president who signed it, and the legacy it left. We talk about the economic instinct to preserve the past—an instinct that has never gone away in American history—and the profound irony, that some efforts to return America to its former glory can have the unintended effect of robbing America of a richer future. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Douglas Irwin Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump's tariff plan has set global markets on fire. What are they for? What are they trying to accomplish? Fresh off his black-out-rage session on CNBC, Derek talks to Matthew Klein, the author of ‘The Overshoot’ newsletter and coauthor with economist Michael Pettis of the widely acclaimed economics book ‘Trade Wars Are Class Wars.’ We talk about the Trump tariffs, their place in history, the goal of reindustrialization, and why our problem with China is a malady worth solving—even if Trump’s medicine is just making us sicker. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Matthew Klein Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump's second term has been a breakneck whirlwind: tariffs announced, tariffs unannounced, tariffs reannounced, allies threatened, and global coalitions ripped apart. What sort of a world are Trump and the White House trying to build? If you stand back from the brush strokes, and take in the full mural, it is possible to see something like a grand economic strategy. One way his chief economic advisers have put it is that we’re using America’s power in the 2020s as leverage to rebalance the global economy in a way that helps U.S. companies grow faster. There are several questions to ask about this stated economic strategy. One is whether or not it’s working. When tariffs designed to buoy the auto manufacturing economy lead instead to hundreds of layoffs among steelworkers getting walloped by trade wars—as they did this past week—it's hard to be confident that Trump's gambit is paying off. A very different question to ask is whether Trump’s economic strategy is _economic—_or, strictly speaking, strategic—at all. Much of our geopolitical agenda today seems to be a simple extrapolation of Donald Trump’s personality. His proclivity for audacious promises. His tactic of using leverage to squeeze counterparties. His preference for mano a mano deal-making over coalitional bargains. Today’s guests are Rogé Karma, a staff writer for The Atlantic, and Jason Furman, an economist at Harvard. We talk about the new world order Trump seems to be accelerating us toward. But we also talk about Trump himself, an unusual leader whose governance style often seems to have more to do with personal leverage than with policy. By evaluating the White House along both of these fronts, perhaps we can begin to see around the corner and understand what kind of a world, and what kind of a global economy, Donald Trump is pulling into view. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Rogé Karma and Jason Furman Producer: Devon Baroldi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Corruption. Class wars. Technological splendor. The dawn of a new age of business and government. Rockefeller and Carnegie. The Gilded Age in America—roughly the 1870s through the early 1900s—was one of the most fascinating and misunderstood eras in our history. It seems like every week, news organizations claim that the U.S. is in a new Gilded Age. But what does that mean? What was the Gilded Age? Today’s guest is Richard White, award-winning historian and author of ‘The Republic for Which It Stands,’ a mammoth history of America between the end of the Civil War and the end of the 19th century. We talk about how corruption and monopoly and power worked during that period. We talk about Rockefeller and Carnegie and Morgan, and how these giants typified the era with their business genius and their thin sense of morality. We talk about how the monopolies of this era used the government, and the government used these monopolies. And we talk about how the movements that emerged from the Gilded Age invented the modern world. If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Richard White Producer: Devon Baroldi P.S. If you live in Seattle, Atlanta, or the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area, Derek is coming your way in March! See him live at book events in your city. Tickets here! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump is serving up a scarcity agenda to America. He and the White House say we don’t have an economy that works, so we might just need to accept a period of economic hardship. They say America cannot afford its debt, and therefore we cannot afford health care for the poor. They say America doesn’t have enough manufacturing, so we have to accept less trade. They say America doesn’t have enough housing, and so we need fewer immigrants. America needs the opposite of this scarcity mindset to grow and thrive. We need an abundance agenda. But what does that mean? The answer to that question is in my new book, which I cowrote with the New York Times columnist and podcaster Ezra Klein. He is also today’s guest. We talk about ‘Abundance’ the book, and why it exists. And we talk about abundance the idea, and why it matters. (You can buy the book here!) If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Ezra Klein Producer: Devon Baroldi P.S. If you live in Seattle, Atlanta, or the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area, Derek is coming your way in March! See him live at book events in your city. Tickets here! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices