Originally published on Substack.

​Washington has a measurement problem. Politicians see prosperity and too often yell, “Government did that!” That’s like a rooster taking credit for the sunrise.
​
Government matters. It should protect property rights, enforce contracts, keep the peace, and provide a stable rule of law. But too often, it gets in the way through taxes, inflation, debt, regulations, subsidies, and favoritism.

A recent Crémieux post on X comparing living standards made an important point: Americans still enjoy some of the highest material living standards in the world. Yes, but the measure deserves care.

AIC measures what people consume, whether bought directly by households or provided individually through government transfers or nonprofits, such as health care and education. It also adjusts for purchasing power, so we’re not pretending a dollar buys the same amount in Texas, Switzerland, or Japan.

Three lessons matter.

1. Measure the right thing. GDP measures production. NAHDI measures worker-supported household purchasing power. AIC measures actual consumption. For comparing living standards, AIC per person is cleaner than a technical worker-based income measure.
   
   
2. Don’t confuse the scoreboard with the game. AIC includes public services because people consume them. It does not mean government created the wealth behind them. The scoreboard records the points. It didn’t block, tackle, pass, or score.
   
   
3. Prosperity starts with production. Before government can spend, someone must earn. Before benefits can be distributed, someone must create wealth. Workers, entrepreneurs, investors, businesses, and families do that through work, saving, risk-taking, innovation, and exchange.
   
   

Government can tax wealth. It can move wealth. It can regulate wealth. But it cannot redistribute wealth that was never created.

America’s advantage is not that Washington discovered a magic formula. It’s that, despite Washington, Americans still build, invest, invent, compete, serve, and solve problems better than most others.

That advantage is not guaranteed. Inflation, excessive government spending, housing restrictions, overregulation, tariffs, corporate welfare, and dependency all weaken the productive engine. They may come wrapped in good intentions, but good intentions don’t pay the bills.

The lesson is that living standards rise when people are free to produce more, trade more, invest more, and keep more of what they earn. So let’s measure prosperity honestly. Then let’s stop pretending government is the hero of every success story.

The hero is the person getting up early, taking risks, building a business, raising a family, learning a skill, saving for tomorrow, and serving customers today. That’s how we get more opportunity, affordability, and abundance. That’s how we let people prosper.
​
If you found this helpful, share it with a friend who needs better economics and fewer slogans. And leave a comment: what measure best captures prosperity?

​Too many people express skepticism about capitalism while enjoying the countless innovations it has produced every day. The smartphones in our pockets, life-saving medicines, online services, modern transportation, and countless other conveniences that make life easier did not appear by accident. They were created by people who had the freedom and incentive to take risks, solve problems, and improve upon existing ideas.

In today’s episode of This Week’s Economy, we’ll take a closer look at innovation and why free markets encourage people to experiment, invest, and develop new technologies that improve our quality of life. We’ll also explore the conditions that enable innovation to flourish and why protecting them is essential for future generations to enjoy greater abundance, opportunity, and prosperity.

Catch the full episode on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify, and visit my website for more information about Ginn Economic Consulting.

America is approaching its 250th birthday, and that should mean more than fireworks, speeches, and nostalgia. It should make us ask a harder question: Do we still understand what made the American experiment different?

The United States did not become prosperous because government officials directed the economy from Washington. It became exceptional because our institutions protected liberty, property, voluntary exchange, civil society, religious freedom, and the rule of law. Those principles gave free people room to work, build, trade, worship, raise families, and solve problems in ways no central planner could design.

That is why I enjoyed this conversation with Samuel Gregg, President of the American Institute for Economic Research. Sam is one of the leading voices connecting economics, history, political philosophy, and the moral foundations of free societies. He previously joined me on Episode 17 of the Let People Prosper Show to discuss free markets, culture, and the future of economic freedom.

​🎧 Listen to the full episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube.
🌐 Learn more about my work at vanceginn.com
📩 Subscribe for weekly analysis at vanceginn.substack.com

Originally published at the Kansas Policy Institute.

The latest bad idea from the global policy class is dressed up as compassion: the world needs less growth. That may sell at international conferences. It should not sell in Kansas.

In a recent piece for the American Institute for Economic Research’s The Daily Economy,“The Poverty of the UN’s Degrowth Agenda,” I explained why the push to move “beyond growth” would leave people poorer, more dependent, and less free. Advocates talk about fairness and sustainability. The result is fewer jobs, less innovation, higher costs, and a smaller future for families trying to get ahead. Kansas does not need that mindset. It has already seen what slow growth does.

The 2026 Kansas Green Book shows Kansas has ranked near the bottom since 1998 in private-sector job growth, private-sector wage growth, GDP growth, and domestic migration. That is not just a data problem. It is a dinner-table problem. When opportunity fades, people leave. Young workers look elsewhere. Businesses expand in states with lower costs and fewer barriers. Families stay only if the numbers still work.

Kansas has real strengths: productive land, capable workers, strong communities, energy resources, manufacturers, logistics advantages, and entrepreneurs who know how to create value. But those strengths can be wasted when the government makes it too expensive to live, hire, invest, and build. 

Recent data show both promise and caution.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that Kansas had the fastest real GDP growth in the nation in the third quarter of 2025 at 6.5 percent annualized. Personal income grew 6.3 percent, also the fastest in the country. Production led the way, with agriculture playing a major role.

That was encouraging. But one strong quarter does not fix a long-term weakness.

The latest BEA first-quarter 2026 report shows U.S. real GDP grew 2.1 percent annualized, while Kansas grew only 1.0 percent. Real GDP increased in 46 states and the District of Columbia. Kansas grew, but it trailed the national pace and remained far from the top performers.

Kansas can grow when people produce more. But it will not sustain growth if policymakers keep accepting high costs, weak competitiveness, and too much government.

Farmers need lower costs and fewer policy shocks. Manufacturers need reliable energy and a better tax climate. Small businesses need less red tape. Families need property taxes that do not punish them for staying in their homes.

As I wrote in “Kansas Has a Cost Problem,” the state collects and spends too much for the results it delivers. Every dollar spent by the government first comes from someone who earned it. There is no free lunch in Topeka. There is only a bill shifted to taxpayers, consumers, property owners, or future generations.

Kansas should start with a responsible budget that grows no faster than population growth plus inflation. Americans for Tax Reform’s Sustainable Budget Project shows how much room Kansas could have created for lasting tax relief if spending had followed that simple limit over the last decade.

That is not austerity. It is discipline.

Kansas should also stop mistaking subsidies for strategy. Ribbon cuttings make good headlines, but favored deals rarely make good economics. As I argued in “Subsidies Cost Kansans Even When Revenues Rise,” every special deal has an opportunity cost. Money used to privilege one company cannot be used to lower rates for everyone.

That matters for agriculture, energy, housing, manufacturing, and technology. Kansas should welcome investment, but with a clear rule: pay your way. Do not ask families and existing businesses to subsidize politically connected projects.

Growth built on favoritism is fragile. Growth “planned” by a policymaker from any political party is no growth at all. Growth built on freedom lasts.

The poverty of the degrowth agenda is that it treats prosperity as something to ration instead of something to unleash. Kansas should reject that error in every form.

Kansas can drift, or Kansas can lead. But it will not lead by producing less, taxing more, subsidizing favorites, or accepting average results.

​Everyone wants to know when the next recession is coming. Wall Street watches every data release. Politicians blame their opponents. The Federal Reserve tries to read the tea leaves. And too many commentators treat recessions as if they are an inevitable punishment after a long expansion. But what if much of that conventional wisdom is wrong?

In this episode of the Let People Prosper Show, I’m joined by Dr. Tyler Goodspeed, Chief Economist at ExxonMobil and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, to discuss his new book, Recession: The Real Reasons Economies Shrink and What to Do about It.

Tyler brings a rare combination of economic history, macroeconomic expertise, and real-world policymaking experience. He served as Chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers during the first Trump administration and previously served as Vice Chairman and Chief Economist for Macroeconomic Policy. We overlapped during my time at the White House Office of Management and Budget, where these debates were not academic. They shaped real decisions affecting millions of Americans. With dual PhDs in economics and history, Tyler has the long-run perspective needed to challenge the easy stories politicians tell about downturns. 

The goal should not be for the government to micromanage the economy. The goal should be to understand what actually causes downturns, avoid making them worse, and build the conditions for stronger long-run growth.

🌐 Learn more about my work at vanceginn.com

📩 Subscribe for show notes at vanceginn.substack.com

​In Episode 167 of This Week’s Economy, we break down why entrepreneurship thrives under free-market capitalism.

Entrepreneurs improve everyday life by solving problems, taking risks, creating jobs, and building better products and services. Markets reward value creation through profit and discipline failure through loss, giving entrepreneurs constant feedback about what consumers actually need.

This episode covers the importance of property rights, contract enforcement, free trade, competition, and responsible policy. It also examines how tariffs, excessive licensing, high taxes, local restrictions, and rising property taxes can make it harder for entrepreneurs to create, invest, and grow.

The lesson is clear: prosperity does not come from central planning. It comes from free people building, competing, serving others, and creating value.
​
Watch or listen to the full episode and learn more at https://vanceginn.com.

​Some conservatives are sounding more like the left on economics.

Tariffs. Industrial policy. Government-directed investment. Picking winners and losers. These policies are increasingly being promoted as solutions to America's affordability challenges, but do they actually help families prosper?

In Episode 201 of the Let People Prosper Show, I sit down with Marc Short, Chairman of Advancing American Freedom, former Chief of Staff to Vice President Mike Pence, and one of the key architects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

We discuss the future of conservative economics, why affordability has become the defining political issue, the legacy of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and whether tariffs and industrial policy help or hurt economic growth and opportunity.

In This Episode:

✅ The future of conservative economics
✅ The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and its legacy
✅ Why affordability matters politically
✅ Tariffs and trade policy
✅ Economic growth and worker prosperity
✅ The New Right versus free-market economics

If you enjoyed this conversation, please like, subscribe, and share it with others.

🌐 Learn more: vanceginn.com

📩 Subscribe: vanceginn.substack.com

Affordability continues to dominate the concerns of American families, and for good reason. As prices remain elevated, energy costs are squeezing household budgets, housing has become increasingly out of reach, and the value of every dollar continues to erode. But these problems didn’t appear out of nowhere; much of today’s affordability crisis is the result of years of bad policy.

In this episode of This Week’s Economy, we’ll examine why inflation remains a persistent burden, how housing shortages and overregulation continue driving up living costs, why tax and spending reforms matter for long-run affordability, and what the future of the Federal Reserve under Kevin Warsh could mean for restoring sound money and economic discipline.

Watch the full episode on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify, and visit my website for more information about my work at Ginn Economic Consulting at vanceginn.com and show notes at vanceginn.substack.com.

Originally published on Substack. 

​Kevin Warsh has now been sworn in as Federal Reserve Chair, and the timing could not be more important.

Inflation remains a threat. Federal debt keeps rising. The Fed’s balance sheet is still massive. Markets are watching whether Washington will keep using monetary policy to paper over fiscal excess or finally restore discipline.
​
Warsh has said many of the right things for years. In his Hoover Institution interview, he argued that the Fed has drifted from its core mandate of price stability, warned about the legacy of quantitative easing, and criticized the central bank’s growing entanglement with fiscal policy. That is exactly the right diagnosis.

Now comes the real test.

Will the Warsh Fed simply manage the same broken framework a little better? Or will it begin the hard work of shrinking the Fed’s footprint, restoring sound money, and ending the central bank’s role as Washington’s fiscal shock absorber?

Inflation Is A Choice

Warsh has been blunt: inflation is not a mystery. It is not a weather pattern. It is a policy outcome.

That matters because too much of Washington still treats inflation as something that happens to policymakers, rather than something policymakers help create. Supply shocks can raise certain prices. Energy disruptions can matter. Wars can matter.

But persistent inflation comes from too much money chasing too few goods and services, often after Congress spends too much and the Fed accommodates it.

This is why I have argued in The Fed’s Latest Move Shows Why the System Must Change and Rules Over Discretion Provide A Path Forward that the Fed needs rules, not vibes. Discretion has given us mission creep, massive asset purchases, distorted markets, and inflationary finance.

The current Fed framework targets 2 percent inflation, but that is not true price stability. It means the dollar loses purchasing power every year by design. A serious reform agenda should move toward a 0 percent inflation target. The goal should be a stable dollar, not a dollar that steadily melts slower than before.

The Balance Sheet Is The Real Story

The Fed’s balance sheet is where the regime change must begin.
​
According to FRED’s WALCL series, the Fed held about $6.714 trillion in total assets as of May 20, 2026

Nominal GDP was about $31.856 trillion in Q1 2026. That means the Fed balance sheet is roughly 21 percent of GDP. Before the 2008 policy crisis, the Fed’s balance sheet was 6 percent of GDP.

My North Star is clear: cap the Fed balance sheet at 6 percent of GDP (maybe lower?) and shrink it steadily until it gets there.
At today’s GDP, 6 percent would be $1.9 trillion. That means the Fed would need to shrink by roughly $4.8 trillion from today’s level. That is not a small adjustment. But it is necessary.

A central bank with a balance sheet above 20 percent of GDP is not merely a lender of last resort. It is a market-maker, fiscal enabler, and interest-rate manipulator. It pushes capital toward government debt, distorts risk pricing, rewards leverage, punishes savers, and allows Congress to avoid the consequences of overspending.

That is not neutral monetary policy. That is central planning through the bond market.

How To Shrink It

The Warsh Fed should announce a simple path.

First, stop reinvesting maturing assets. Let short-term Treasuries mature and do not roll them over.

Second, stop holding mortgage-backed securities. Housing finance should not be managed by the central bank.

Third, move the portfolio toward short-term Treasury bills during the transition, then continue shrinking as those mature.
Fourth, publish a schedule that gets the balance sheet to 6 percent of GDP (lower?) within a defined window, with emergency deviations allowed only through transparent congressional authorization.

Fifth, pair the balance sheet rule with a 0 percent inflation target.

That would be a real dual rule: stable money and a shrinking central bank footprint.

Yes, interest rates will likely rise as the Fed stops suppressing them. That is not a flaw. That is the market finally being allowed to speak. Artificially low rates feel good at first, but they create malinvestment, debt addiction, asset bubbles, and inflationary pressure. The medicine is uncomfortable because the disease has been allowed to spread for too long.

Congress Must Stop Feeding The Fed

But the Fed cannot fix Washington’s spending addiction.

The CBO’s latest outlook projects a $1.9 trillion deficit in 2026, rising to $3.1 trillion by 2036. The deficit is projected to grow from 5.8 percent of GDP to 6.7 percent, while debt help by the public rises to 120 percent of GDP by 2036. That is the real source of pressure on the Fed.

There is growing support for a 3 percent of GDP annual deficit target. That would be better than today’s reckless path, but let’s be honest: it is not enough. A 3 percent deficit is still a deficit. It still adds debt. It still assumes Washington should permanently spend more than it collects. It still leaves future taxpayers holding the bag.

The real goal should be a 0 percent deficit with spending less and restraint as the focus.

That means Congress should adopt a sustainable budgeting rule that limits federal spending growth to no more than population growth plus inflation, as I explain in my Sustainable Budgeting for a More Prosperous Economy guide. The problem is not that Americans are undertaxed. The problem is that Washington spends too much.

Spending is the disease. Deficits, debt, inflation, and Fed intervention are symptoms.

Back To Lender Of Last Resort

The Fed should not be an unelected economic czar.

It should not manage climate policy. It should not allocate credit. It should not subsidize housing. It should not rescue Congress from the consequences of overspending. It should not manipulate the yield curve to make debt cheaper than markets would otherwise allow.

At most, while the Fed exists, it should be a narrow lender of last resort for solvent institutions during genuine liquidity crises, following clear rules and transparent limits.

And yes, my long-run North Star remains ending the Fed. There is no need for a central bank to manage a free economy. Money should be sound, markets should set interest rates, and Congress should not have a monetary escape hatch for fiscal irresponsibility.

But as long as the Fed exists, it must be constrained.

That is why my Finance Policy Guide calls for ending the Fed’s role as an unelected economic czar, capping the balance sheet at 6 percent of GDP, banning non-Treasury debt monetization, moving to rules-based policy, and requiring a full independent audit.

Warsh has an opening to move in that direction.

Three Takeaways For Policymakers

1. Make price stability mean 0 percent inflation.

The Fed’s 2 percent target still erodes purchasing power. A stable dollar should be the goal, not slower monetary decay.

2. Cap the Fed balance sheet at 6 percent of GDP.

At roughly 21 percent of GDP today, the Fed’s balance sheet is far too large. Let assets mature, stop reinvestment, end MBS holdings, and shrink toward a narrow lender-of-last-resort role.

3. Fix Congress’s spending problem.

A 3 percent deficit target is better than the current path, but the right goal is balance. Spending should grow no faster than population growth plus inflation, and preferably less.

The Bottom Line

Kevin Warsh has said the Fed needs reform. Now he has the chair.

The task is not to manage the old system more politely. The task is to change the regime.

Shrink the balance sheet. Target 0 percent inflation. Stop enabling Congress. Let interest rates reflect real market conditions. Restore the Fed to a narrow lender-of-last-resort role until the country is ready to eliminate it altogether.

Sound money is not optional. It is the foundation of affordability, investment, savings, and liberty.

Originally published on Substack. 

Americans do not need another speech about affordability. They need policymakers to stop making life more expensive.

Families feel the pressure everywhere: at the gas pump, the grocery store, the doctor’s office, the insurance bill, the rent payment, the mortgage statement, and the credit card balance.

These are not isolated frustrations. They are the result of years of government spending too much, inflating too much, regulating too much, subsidizing too much, and blocking too much of the supply families need.

That is why I call this what it is: a man-made affordability crisis.

Markets did not fail families. Policy failed families!

Families Feel It First

The latest Consumer Price Index report shows prices rose 3.8 percent over the last year in April, with the monthly CPI up 0.6 percent after rising 0.9 percent in March. Energy rose 3.8 percent in April and accounted for more than 40 percent of the monthly increase. Gasoline rose 5.4 percent in April and was up 28.4 percent over the year. Food rose 3.2 percent over the year, shelter rose 3.3 percent, and electricity rose 6.1 percent.

Those numbers are not just data points. They are family budgets breaking under the weight of bad policy.

The national AAA gas price average was $4.515 per gallon on May 18. For families commuting to work, hauling kids to activities, or operating small businesses, that is not a minor annoyance. It is a direct tax on mobility, work, and opportunity.

Inflation Is Policy

Some price spikes come from shocks. The latest energy surge has a clear global component. The Energy Information Administration expects Brent crude oil prices to fall later this year as Middle East production rises, but the May outlook still projects $95 per barrel Brent in 2026 and average U.S. retail gasoline of $3.88 per gallon.

That matters. A geopolitical shock can raise oil prices. A refinery disruption can raise fuel prices. A drought can raise food prices. Those are real.

But persistent inflation is not an act of God. It is the consequence of too much money chasing too few goods and services, driven by loose monetary, fiscal, and regulatory failures.

Supply Still Matters

If policymakers learn only one lesson from the current energy spike, it should be this: supply matters.

Energy prices rise when global supply becomes uncertain. Housing prices rise when zoning, permitting, and land-use rules block construction. Health care prices rise when third-party payment, mandates, and federal distortions separate patients from prices. Food prices rise when energy, labor, transportation, and compliance costs rise.

This is not complicated. It is Econ 101.

If you restrict supply while subsidizing demand, prices go up. If you make production harder while handing out checks, prices go up. If you regulate, delay, mandate, and sue away the ability to build, drill, refine, treat, transport, insure, and compete, prices go up.

Then politicians act surprised when families cannot afford the result.

Government Keeps Adding Costs

Too much of today’s affordability agenda is backwards.

Price controls do not create more supply. They create shortages and distortions.

Gas-tax holidays do not create more gasoline. They are political theater, like sales-tax holidays, temporary payroll-tax cuts, homestead exemptions, and other carveouts that make the tax code more complicated while avoiding the real problem.

Tariffs do not make families richer. They raise prices by taxing imports and reducing competition.

Subsidies do not make goods magically cheaper. They shift costs to taxpayers, hide prices, and often bid up demand in already-constrained markets.

Regulations do not become free just because politicians say they serve a good purpose. Compliance costs flow through to families in higher prices, fewer choices, and lower wages.

That is the unseen cost. Bastiat would recognize it immediately: the store that was never opened, the home that was never built, the doctor who quit, the small business that never hired, and the family that never got ahead.

Debt Is Eating The Future

The federal budget makes this worse.

The Congressional Budget Office projects a $1.9 trillion deficit in fiscal year 2026, rising to $3.1 trillion by 2036. Debt held by the public is projected to reach 120 percent of GDP by 2036, and rising net interest costs drive much of the worsening outlook.

That is not sustainable. It is also not compassionate.

Every dollar government borrows must eventually be paid through taxes, inflation, reduced private investment, or slower growth. Excessive spending today becomes an affordability problem tomorrow. Families may not see “federal deficit” on their grocery receipt, but they feel the consequences through higher prices, higher interest rates, weaker wage growth, and fewer opportunities.

Washington has spent years pretending it can avoid tradeoffs. It cannot. The tradeoffs just show up later, and families usually pay first.

The Wrong Fixes

The wrong response is more government management.

Do not cap prices.

Do not punish profits.

Do not impose windfall taxes.

Do not subsidize demand into constrained supply.

Do not keep narrowing tax bases with carveouts.

Do not claim tariffs are pro-worker when they raise families’ costs.

Do not pretend that more debt is free.

These policies may sound compassionate, patriotic, or populist. Too much government has made life less affordable.

Freedom Fixes Affordability

The better path is not mysterious. It is just politically harder.

Start with spending restraint. Federal, state, and local governments should limit spending growth to no more than population growth plus inflation, and ideally less. If government stops growing faster than taxpayers’ ability to pay, the pressure for higher taxes, more debt, and inflationary finance falls.

Then remove barriers to supply. Let builders build homes. Let energy producers produce. Let doctors and patients contract directly. Let entrepreneurs compete. Let workers keep more of what they earn. Let prices signal scarcity instead of letting politicians pretend scarcity does not exist.

A serious affordability agenda should include:

More energy abundance.

More housing supply.

More health care competition.

Lower and flatter taxes.

Less regulation.

Less spending.

Sound money.

Fewer subsidies and carveouts.

More trust in people.

That is how you lower costs without destroying the market process that creates abundance in the first place.

Three Takeaways for Policymakers

1. Affordability starts with spending restraint.

Government spending is the root disease behind higher taxes, debt, inflation pressure, and fiscal fragility. If lawmakers do not control spending, families will keep paying through higher costs.

2. Supply-side freedom lowers prices.

More energy, housing, health care competition, and entrepreneurship will do more for affordability than price controls, subsidies, tariffs, or temporary tax gimmicks.

3. Stop hiding the cost of government.

Debt, inflation, mandates, regulations, and carveouts let politicians shift costs instead of reducing them. Families need honest prices, lower burdens, and more choices.

The Bottom Line

The affordability crisis is man-made.

That means it can be fixed.

But not by politicians pretending they can manage prices, subsidize scarcity, or borrow without consequences. It will be fixed when the government spends less, regulates less, taxes less, and stops blocking the supply families need.

Affordability will not come from more central planning. It will come from abundance, discipline, and freedom.

Thank you for reading and for sharing my work. If this added value to your week, please pass it along to a policymaker, staffer, journalist, or friend who should read it. Through Ginn Economic Consulting, I’m glad to help policymakers and organizations think through spending restraint, tax reform, energy abundance, health care competition, and pro-growth policies that let people prosper.