Who are they?: The 16 Nobel Prize Winners Predicting Inflation Under Trump
In a recent statement, Joe Biden has highlighted concerns from sixteen esteemed economists, all Nobel Prize winners, warning that a second term for Donald Trump could lead to increased inflation. The letter signed by these economists outlines their concerns about the economic ramifications of a Trump presidency.
The letter reads:
We the undersigned are deeply concerned about the risks of a second Trump administration for the U.S. economy.
Among the most important determinants of economic success are the rule of law and economic and political certainty. For a country like the U.S., which is embedded in deep relationships with other countries, conforming to international norms and having normal and stable relationships with other countries is also an imperative. Donald Trump and the vagaries of his actions and policies threaten this stability and the U.S.’s standing in the world.
While each of us has different views on the particulars of various economic policies, we all agree that Joe Biden’s economic agenda is vastly superior to Donald Trump’s. In his first four years as President, Joe Biden signed into law major investments in the U.S. economy, including in infrastructure, domestic manufacturing, and climate. Together, these investments are likely to increase productivity and economic growth while lowering long-term inflationary pressures and facilitating the clean energy transition.
During Joe Biden’s presidency we have also seen a remarkably strong and equitable labor market recovery — enabled by his pandemic stimulus. An additional four years of Joe Biden’s presidency would allow him to continue supporting an inclusive U.S. economic recovery.
Many Americans are concerned about inflation, which has come down remarkably fast. There is rightly a worry that Donald Trump will reignite this inflation, with his fiscally irresponsible budgets. Nonpartisan researchers, including at Evercore, Allianz, Oxford Economics, and the Peterson Institute, predict that if Donald Trump successfully enacts his agenda, it will increase inflation.
The outcome of this election will have economic repercussions for years, and possibly decades, to come. We believe that a second Trump term would have a negative impact on the U.S.’s economic standing in the world and a destabilizing effect on the U.S.’s domestic economy.
Signed,
The Signatories: Who Are These Economists?
1. George A. Akerlof (2001)
- Background: American economist, university professor at Georgetown University, and Koshland Professor of Economics Emeritus at UC Berkeley.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for contributions to the understanding of markets with asymmetric information. Husband of Janet Yellen, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.
2. Sir Angus Deaton (2015)
- Background: British-American economist, Dwight D. Eisenhower Professor of Economics and International Affairs Emeritus at Princeton University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for analysis of consumption, poverty, and welfare.
3. Claudia Goldin (2023)
- Background: American economic historian and labor economist, Henry Lee Professor of Economics at Harvard University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for advancing understanding of women’s labor market outcomes.
4. Sir Oliver Hart (2016)
- Background: British-born American economist, Lewis P. and Linda L. Geyser University Professor at Harvard University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for contributions to contract theory.
5. Eric S. Maskin (2007)
- Background: American economist and mathematician, Adams University Professor at Harvard University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for foundational work on mechanism design theory.
6. Daniel L. McFadden (2000)
- Background: American economist and econometrician, Presidential Professor of Health Economics at USC.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for development of methods for analyzing discrete choice behavior.
7. Paul R. Milgrom (2020)
- Background: American economist, known for auction theory, co-creator of the no-trade theorem.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for improvements to auction theory.
8. Roger B. Myerson (2007)
- Background: American economist, professor at the University of Chicago.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for work on mechanism design theory.
9. Edmund S. Phelps (2006)
- Background: American economist, founder of Columbia’s Center on Capitalism and Society.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for demonstrating the golden rule savings rate.
10. Paul M. Romer (2018)
- Background: American economist, University Professor in Economics at Boston College.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for contributions to endogenous growth theory.
11. Alvin E. Roth (2012)
- Background: American economist, Craig and Susan McCaw Professor of Economics at Stanford University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for work on market design and experimental economics.
12. William F. Sharpe (1990)
- Background: American economist, STANCO 25 Professor of Finance Emeritus at Stanford University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for contributions to financial economics, creator of the Sharpe ratio.
13. Robert J. Shiller (2013)
- Background: American economist, Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for empirical analysis of asset prices.
14. Christopher A. Sims (2011)
- Background: American econometrician and macroeconomist, John J.F. Sherrerd ’52 University Professor of Economics at Princeton University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for research on cause and effect in the macroeconomy.
15. Joseph E. Stiglitz (2001)
- Background: American economist, University Professor at Columbia University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for research on information asymmetry.
16. Robert B. Wilson (2020)
- Background: American economist, Adams Distinguished Professor of Management, Emeritus at Stanford University.
- Notable Work: Nobel Prize for contributions to auction theory.
Analysis
Despite their credentials, it’s noteworthy that many of these Nobel laureates were awarded for their work in specialized areas such as game theory, rather than macroeconomic policy or inflation forecasting. This raises questions about their expertise in predicting inflation outcomes from policy decisions.
In their letter, they emphasize concerns over Trump’s approach to fiscal responsibility and international relations. They argue that Biden’s economic agenda, marked by significant investments in infrastructure and manufacturing, is better suited to maintaining economic stability and controlling inflation.
The concerns raised by these Nobel-winning economists suggest that the upcoming election could have significant economic repercussions. However, the relevance of their specialized fields to the broader economic issues at hand, particularly inflation, should be carefully considered. As the election draws near, voters must weigh these expert opinions alongside their own views and experiences.
Texas Senate Primaries Show Early Leads for Crockett and Paxton
AUSTIN, Texas – A new poll released by The Texas Tribune indicates that Jasmine Crockett and Ken Paxton are leading their respective primary races for the U.S. Senate seat in Texas. The survey, published on February 9, 2026, highlights the early momentum for both candidates as they vie for their party nominations in a closely watched election cycle. The results point to strong voter recognition and support for Crockett in the Democratic primary and Paxton in the Republican primary.
The poll, conducted among likely primary voters across the state, shows Crockett holding a significant lead over her Democratic challenger James Talarico, while Paxton maintains a commanding position among Republican contenders John Cornyn & Wesley Hunt.
According to the poll, Ken Paxton leads with 38 percent of likely GOP primary voters, pulling ahead of incumbent John Cornyn, who trails at 31 percent, while Wesley Hunt remains a distant third at 17 percent. The survey indicates Paxton would hold a commanding advantage in a runoff scenario and currently outperforms Cornyn across nearly every key Republican demographic group, with Latino voters the lone exception, where Cornyn maintains a seven-point edge.
Among Democrats, the poll shows Jasmine Crockett opening a notable lead, capturing 47 percent of likely primary voters compared to 39 percent for James Talarico—a meaningful shift from earlier polling that had Talarico in the lead. While still early, the numbers suggest momentum is consolidating ahead of primaries that will determine the general election matchups.
Jasmine Crockett, a sitting U.S. Representative whose district lines were redrawn out from under her, has responded to political extinction with a desperate lurch toward the U.S. Senate. Her campaign, widely criticized as race-baiting and grievance-driven, has leaned heavily on inflaming urban Democratic turnout while cloaking thin policy substance in fashionable slogans about healthcare and “equity.”
By contrast, Ken Paxton enters the race with a long, battle-tested record as Texas Attorney General, earning fierce loyalty from conservatives for his aggressive defense of state sovereignty, constitutional limits, and successful legal challenges to federal overreach. Though relentlessly targeted by opponents, Paxton’s tenure reflects durability, clarity of purpose, and an unapologetic alignment with the voters he represents—qualities that define his standing in the contest.
The Texas U.S. Senate race draws national attention, as the state remains a critical battleground in determining the balance of power in Congress. With incumbent dynamics and shifting voter demographics at play, the primary outcomes will set the stage for a potentially contentious general election. The Texas Tribune poll serves as an initial benchmark, though voter sentiment could evolve as campaigns intensify and debates unfold in the coming weeks.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem joined national security leaders in a dual-state event to commemorate a historic decline in border crossings, according to an official release from the Department of Homeland Security. The event spanned two locations, Arizona and North Dakota, in a single day, highlighting coordinated efforts to strengthen border security. Noem, alongside other officials, marked the achievement as a significant milestone in national security policy.
The Department of Homeland Security reported a measurable drop in unauthorized border crossings, attributing the success to enhanced enforcement measures and inter-agency collaboration. Specific data on the decline was not detailed in the initial announcement, though officials emphasized the impact of recent policy implementations. The two-state commemoration underscored the geographic breadth of the issue, addressing both southern and northern border concerns.
In Arizona, Noem and security leaders reviewed operations along the southern border, a longstanding focal point for immigration enforcement. Later in the day, the group traveled to North Dakota to assess northern border security, an area often overlooked in national discussions but critical to comprehensive policy. The dual focus aimed to demonstrate a unified approach to protecting all U.S. borders, per the department’s statement.
The official release from Homeland Security included remarks from Noem, who praised the dedication of personnel involved in the effort. “This decline in crossings is a testament to the hard work of our agents and the effectiveness of our strategies,” she said. Her comments were echoed by other leaders present, though no additional direct quotations were provided in the initial report.
Background on the border security initiatives reveals a multi-year push to address vulnerabilities at both entry points. Southern border challenges, particularly in Arizona, have long dominated policy debates due to high volumes of crossings and complex terrain. Meanwhile, northern border issues in states like North Dakota often involve different dynamics, including trade security and seasonal migration patterns. The Department of Homeland Security has prioritized resources for both regions, though specific funding allocations remain undisclosed in the latest update.
The cause of the reported decline ties directly to recent enforcement actions, though exact mechanisms were not specified in the announcement. Officials pointed to improved technology, increased staffing, and stronger partnerships with local and state authorities as contributing factors. Further details on these efforts are expected in forthcoming reports from the department, which has committed to transparency on border metrics.
Opinion
The recognition of a decline in border crossings signals a potential turning point in how the nation secures its frontiers. Celebrating this achievement in two distinct regions reinforces the importance of a comprehensive strategy that does not neglect less-discussed areas like the northern border.
Events like these also serve as a reminder that security is not a partisan issue but a fundamental duty of government. Prioritizing resources and personnel to protect sovereignty while maintaining lawful entry processes should remain a core focus, ensuring that progress is sustained through consistent policy and accountability.
CARACAS, VENEZUELA — When President Donald J. Trump dropped the phrase “Discombobulator” in a recent interview, the world sat up and took notice. According to the president, the United States deployed a secret weapon to render Venezuelan military systems useless as U.S. forces executed a daring raid that resulted in the capture of Nicolás Maduro.
In an interview with the New York Post, Trump stated the device “made the equipment not work,” and that Venezuelan radar, missiles, and defensive systems “never got their rockets off” during the operation. “I’m not allowed to talk about it,” he said, referring to the classified nature of the technology.
The remarks have sparked curiosity, skepticism, and intense speculation about what the “Discombobulator” might actually be — and what its use means for U.S. military capability and foreign policy.
What Happened: The Maduro Raid and the Discombobulator Claim
On January 3, 2026, U.S. special operations forces carried out a rapid, highly coordinated mission in Caracas that culminated in the capture of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores. The operation, code-named Operation Absolute Resolve, involved aircraft, helicopters, unmanned drones, and elite troops.
Speaking about the raid, Trump took credit for the success, telling the New York Post and others that a classified weapon, the so-called Discombobulator, as he called it, played a decisive role. He claimed that the device disabled Venezuelan military equipment, including systems supplied by Russia and China, before U.S. forces landed.
According to Trump’s account, Venezuelan troops tried to activate their defenses, “pressed buttons,” and found nothing worked. The president’s description suggests a form of electronic or directed-energy warfare — although he offered no detail on mechanism or development.
Context: Military Technology and Secrecy
The U.S. military has long invested in electronic warfare and directed-energy research. Systems that jam radar, disrupt communications, and interfere with electronic signals have been under development for decades. Yet no publicly acknowledged program has been confirmed to match Trump’s description of the Discombobulator.
Wartime secrecy and classification make it entirely plausible that capabilities not widely known could exist. Still, without independent verification or military documentation, journalists and analysts caution against jumping to definitive claims based on the president’s interview alone.
Conservative Commentary and Conclusion (Opinion)
The success of the Maduro raid reflects decisive leadership and a willingness to act where lesser administrations have hesitated. The Discombobulator claim — irrespective of its accuracy — underscores a broader theme: American ingenuity paired with bold strategy is unstoppable.
If such a capability exists and was responsibly employed to save lives and neutralize threats without explosive conflict, it represents a powerful demonstration of military superiority. Critics who mock the name risk missing the larger strategic point.
Whether the Discombobulator ends up in the annals of military history or remains a rhetorical flourish, the episode has already ignited fear in our adversaries about American power, innovation, and military might.
Sources:
- President Trump comments on “Discombobulator,” PBS NewsHour, Jan. 26, 2026.
- AP News reporting on Trump’s interview and weapon description.
- Gulf News analysis of unnamed weapon and its reported effects.
- Axios on use of U.S. drones and technology in operation.
- Wikipedia entry on 2026 United States intervention in Venezuela.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login