Historian and author Jerry Muller of Catholic University talks about his latest book, The Tyranny of Metrics, with EconTalk host Russ Roberts. Muller argues that public policy and management are overly focused on measurable outcomes as a measure of success. This leads to organizations and agencies over-focusing on metrics rather than their broader mission. The conversation includes applications to education, crime, and health care.

If you or someone you love is stricken with cancer, you'd do anything to prolong their life, wouldn't you? To what extent will your response depend on the cost of the treatment available? In this week's episode, EconTalk host Russ Roberts welcomes Mayo Clinic oncologist Vincent Rajkumar to talk about the seemingly exorbitant cost of cancer-fighting drugs.

1. What's the "philosophical challenge" Roberts raises at about the ten minute mark (but which persists throughout the episode) regarding the effective use of money to make life better? Where do you stand with regard to this question, and why?

Can a life-saving drug be too expensive? What explains the high price of cancer drugs? Dr. Vincent Rajkumar of the Mayo Clinic talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the high price of cancer drugs--drugs that can cost an American with cancer $300,000 per year and require multiple years of treatment. Rajkumar explains how little a role market forces play in setting prices and what might be done to improve the situation.

by Alice Temnick

Could a congestion tax be a "best solution" among "poor alternatives?" In this week's episode, host Russ Roberts and recurring guest economist Michael Munger delve deeply into variations of taxation and the consequences of taxation in an attempt to reduce this ubiquitous urban problem.

Does your daily commute make you angry? Share your thoughts with us about addressing (or accepting) high traffic commutes, incentives that work and how you think about this collective action problem. We want to hear from you!

1. Munger points out that people are becoming more productive while stuck in traffic, that as disutility decreases, there is an increase in willingness to be on the road during high traffic times. How do smart-phones affect one's opportunity cost of commute time? What else might contribute to this effect? Is this increased productivity a net positive effect?

Does rush-hour traffic drive you crazy? Is a congestion tax on car travel a good idea? Michael Munger of Duke University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the economics of traffic and congestion taxes. It takes a while to get there (how appropriate!) but they eventually agree that a tax on congestion while reducing travel time is harmful to many drivers and may be best thought of as any tax placed on a particular good--a way to raise government revenue from the pockets of the consumers of that good.

Despite low official unemployment rates, this week's EconTalk guest, economist Edward Glaeser, argues that joblessness is "the great American domestic crisis of the 21st century." What accounts for this seemingly unprecedented economic and social crisis? And what's different about changing patterns of employment today? We don't bemoan the loss of blacksmiths, but the loss of manufacturing and mining jobs in America's heartland seems much more tragic. Host Russ Roberts and Glaeser explore the possible causes and discuss potential responses in this fascinating episode.

As usual, now we'd like to get your reaction. Consider responding to one of our prompts in the comments, or pose a question of your own. We love to hear from you!

1. What's the distinction between unemployment and joblessness, and why does Glaeser put so much emphasis on it?

Why are fewer men working over the last few decades? Is a universal basic income a good policy for coping with the loss of employment? Economist Edward Glaeser of Harvard University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about what Glaeser calls the war on work--the policy changes that have reduced employment among prime-aged men. Glaeser does not see the universal basic income as a viable solution to the decrease in work especially if technology ends up reducing employment opportunities more dramatically in the future. The conversation also includes a discussion of the role of cities and the reduction in geographic mobility in the United States.

Is our knee-jerk reaction to the dangers of occupational licensing overdone? Would we be better served by taking a more nuanced approach? In this week's episode, EconTalk host Russ Roberts welcomes sociologist Beth Redbird to explore these questions. Roberts is surprised by some of her findings...Were you?

We hope you'll use these prompts (or leave us some of your own) to share your reaction to this week's episode in the Comments. As always, we love to hear from you!

1. Redbird notes a dramatic increase in occupational licensing since the 1970s and 80s. What accounts for this increase? What's wrong with our estimates of licensing effects?

Economists often oppose the expansion of licensing in America in recent years because it makes it harder for people with low skills to get access to opportunity. Sociologist Beth Redbird of Northwestern University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about a different perspective. Redbird finds that licensing expands opportunity for women and minorities and has little impact on wages. She argues that licensing helps historically disadvantaged groups discover ways into various careers they otherwise would have trouble accessing. The discussion closes with a discussion of Redbird's work on the economic situation of Native Americans.

Are economists outdated? Has our economy changed more than professional economists can keep up with? If all the practitioners of economics were to develop amnesia, which concepts would still remain when they woke up? In this week's episode, host Russ Roberts welcomes back Econlib's own Arnold Kling, who has a unique critique of the state of economics today.

What do you think the most enduring economics concepts are? How ought economists approach their subject anew? As always, we want to know how you would like to continue the conversation.

1. Kling makes the case for price discrimination as one of the most timeless concepts in economics. What's his argument for its importance, and to what extent do you agree? What concept(s) would you suggest as enduring across the ages, and why?