Nominal News is an economics newsletter written by a PhD Economist that translates the latest economic research into clear, policy‑relevant insights on current issues. Join 4,000 readers to stay-up-to-date with Nominal News directly in your inbox:
I have recently started writing full time and am turning on a paid feature in September, in addition to the current free offering. If you’d like to help me with some feedback (and a chance to win a 3-Month Paid Subscription tier) – please fill out the questionnaire below:
Nominal News Reader Questionnaire
Hello,
After going full-time on Nominal News earlier this month, I would like to introduce myself:
My name is Pawel and I am the writer behind Nominal News. To give a bit of background, I completed my PhD in Economics at New York University and live in New York City. My research at NYU focused on macroeconomics, trade and labor.
Specifically, my main research paper focused on the issue of how trade liberalization can unevenly impact people’s lifetime earnings, generating a situation where some people (in this case, it was manufacturing workers) are explicitly worse off under trade liberalization, even though the majority are better off.1 Here you can find my personal site with my research (I also hope to progress these papers as I have not had the opportunity to work on them since 2021!).
Why Nominal News
During my PhD, I had the privilege of hearing from many brilliant economists.2 Through these experiences, I got to learn the economic intuition and way of thinking that I realized is often restricted to the confines of academia. This inspired me to share this knowledge and experience with others, which is why I launched Nominal News.
With Nominal News, I want to teach you the economic tools and way of thinking that I learned during my time in PhD, rather than just focusing on giving ‘an answer’. Economic thinking can be used in nearly all settings, as, to me, economic thinking is modeling human behavior – how do people respond to things and to each other.
For example, suppose a government proposes a new tax-advantaged savings account for children. The initial thought might be that such an account will help people save on behalf of their children. But a deeper dive would show us that such an account is unlikely to generate new savings (wealthier people will save less in other accounts; lower income individuals often have insufficient income to save). This type of understanding can shine a completely different perspective on a policy and what it will actually achieve.
With Nominal News, I hope that this type of ‘deeper-dive’ thinking becomes second nature when considering economic policies,or any social policy.
Beyond Economics – How Nominal News Can Help Elsewhere
These tools and methods can be applied to anything that involves human behavior – economic policy, business decisions and even personal life choices. Some examples of questions that economic thinking may help:
If I’m setting prices for products, what should they be going forward? – understanding how government policies impact inflation will be important
Suppose I implement a new inventory or payments system, how can I determine if this system is generating benefits?3
Should I pursue a very technical, narrow degree or go for a more broad liberal arts degree?
Economic thinking can help you with these questions and also ensure that you ask the right questions around these problems.
What To Expect
Going forward with Nominal News, I will continue to remain research-based. I will aim to share the methods and assumptions behind the research, and not just the results (as these results can be driven by the selected assumptions).
Any insights or opinion on my end will always be driven by research. I will also aim to keep the distinction between the research and my opinions separate. I think these are important tenets to be driven by, as a lot of public economic commentary can often seem like it’s based on the best available research, but really, it’s just a person’s personal policy preferences.
Article: The US Census – Hosting An Unnamed ‘Analysis’
On August 18, 2026, the US Census Bureau, a federal statistical agency, posted on its website, a report called: “Noncitizen Voting in the 2020 Election, A Beginning Analysis”.4 The report touches on a politically charged topic of whether ineligible people voted in US elections. But the report itself had two large red flags – it had no author and it lacked critical methodological elements.
The US Census Bureau
The US Census Bureau is a highly regarded institution. Its role in the US is critical, as the data it collects ends up being used to allocate seats across the US for the House of Representatives. It also has staff researchers that publish analyses based on the highly sensitive Census data. Every report typically has a specific author and a well described methodology section. Here is one such example “Monthly and Episodic Poverty: 2024” authored by Marissa Nicole Davila.
On the other hand, the Noncitizen Voting in the 2020 Election, A Beginning Analysis report contains no authorship nor any serious discussion of methodology. Both of these issues immediately raised concern in the economics community, as it suggested that the level of analysis is not something that would be considered acceptable.
Besides the lack of authorship, experts highlighted that the key term used in the report – non-citizen – is not actually a legal definition. This is a serious issue: in a February 2026 investigation of a Texas county, individuals were identified as non-citizens (and thus, the implication that they are not eligible to vote). However, it turned out that many identified individuals were citizens.5
The concerns raised by the research community turned out to be vindicated, as NPR found that the published report was not written by anyone at the US Census, but rather written by a politically linked think-tank:
“Work on the analysis was not conducted by career civil servants at the Census Bureau, and the team behind it included individuals affiliated with the America First Policy Institute, a think tank started by officials from Trump’s first administration, according to a Census Bureau employee who NPR has agreed not to name because they fear retaliation at work.”
The Importance of Institutions
The reason this issue is significant is that the US Census is a trusted source for rigorous data collection and research. It’s not a surprise that people would want to use the US Census as a seal of approval on their ‘research’. Such undermining of the institution can have long run consequences, as politicizing such institutions can only lead to bad outcomes.
It was promising to see that no one at the US Census put their names on this poor quality analysis. Moreover, the broad and swift criticism of this analysis is another good sign, as it helps protect the integrity of the institution. Regardless, it’s very unfortunate that such an analysis was published on their site.
Next week, I will officially launch a paid tier. My post next week will cover how it’ll work (Note: most importantly, weekly deep dives will remain free!)
If you would like to support us in reaching our subscriber goal of 7,000 subscribers, please consider sharing this article and pressing the like❤️ button at top or bottom of this article!
Most trade liberalization papers find trade liberalization to improve outcomes for everyone, even if the gains are not spread equally.
One of the most impressive things was seeing economists figure out the inner workings of a new research paper within the first ten minutes of a one hour seminar.
I spoke with a friend who was determining if a new system being placed in certain stores is generating benefits to the business. I suggested using a synthetic control method to evaluate the system.
I am intentionally not linking the report.
From the article: “A February 2026 investigation by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune begins: ‘It later turned out more than half the Boone County voters identified as noncitizens [by the SAVE program] were actually citizens.’ Just last month, DHS Secretary Mullin sent letters to California, Nevada, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania alleging hundreds of thousands of noncitizens on their voter rolls. MS NOW reported this week that ‘more than a month later, the Department of Homeland Security is struggling to provide any proof.’”
Congrats on doing this full time and nice to meet the person behind Nominal News!
I generally steered clear from trade in grad school, as I was primarily interested in labor and demographics, so it's nice to have this perspective. But it makes sense that manufacturing workers would "lose" in trade liberalization. People follow incentives, and (almost?) every person I have ever spoken to in manufacturing has advocated for tariffs, even at the expense of the rest of the country.
Glad you are also pursuing your research! Best of luck!
Is it really true that most previus studies had found that trade liberalizationwas universally benficial? That is certainly not a therotical expectation in light of Stolper Samuelson.