A small but great example of this is how there’s was this huge freak out out the bee population declining but then next to no one heard about the new population recovery. 1/4
The reason this example is on my mind is I was at a housing policy meeting recently and there was this environmentalist citing bees as why we can’t allow new neighborhoods and so I showed her charts about the bee pop recovering. You’d think she’d have loved that news but… 2/4
She was actually mad about it. And I think it was because I was implicitly arguing against her worldview.
That’s where I think there’s a bigger lesson. Negativity bias breeds NIMBYism. If every change is bad, why allow change?
If modernity sucks, why lean into the future? 3/4
If you want to encourage a culture of progress, you have to point out over and over again that we have it great today compared to the past (and there are hundreds, if not thousands of examples of that).
And people in 2070 will have it even better than we do. @jasoncrawford 4/4
Apologies for the typos. I need an edit button.
This is getting some attention.....
I'm not trying to sell you anything + I don't have anything for you to click on.
I hope y'all have a nice weekend. Trump supporter, Harris supporter, you're all my fellow Americans/fellow humans (truly!) and I'm rooting for you. You got this!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A story that illuminates why abundance liberals are going to struggle with some progressive activists:
In March, I gave a talk on climate tech at a senior center - they loved it! In Q&A, a woman asked “how do we get people to do their part + dry their clothes on the line?” 1/7
I explained to her that we don’t need to do that and she seemed disappointed at the possibility of that being true. She didn’t want a tech solution. She wanted people to willingly choose to live more simply and more equally out of sense of shared moral obligation. 2/7
It reminded of a person I’d heard on NPR during COVID who said something like “I hope the masks never go away, I love what they represent, they’re me taking care of you + you taking care of me.” I found that stunning. How could one be that into solidarity signaling? 3/7
Today, the House passed the “Building Chips in America Act” sponsored by @SenMarkKelly and @SenTedCruz in the Senate last year. It’s a really cool permitting reform bill related to semiconductors. Here's a quick explanation of what it does and why it matters. 1/ @noahpinion
In 2022, through the CHIPS and Science Act, Congress allocated around $40 billion in subsidies for new semiconductor manufacturing facilities known as fabs. Semiconductors are arguably the world’s most important technology and Congress wants them made HERE. 2/ @crmiller1
Because of those subsidies, those fabs would be considered “major federal action” and so would be subject to NEPA. For those of you who aren’t deep in the weeds of permitting, NEPA is the National Environmental Policy Act and was created in 1969. 3/
I think it’s important that this article gets some push back because, if Democrats listen to it, they’re going to get housing policy reform wrong, to the detriment of many millions of Americans.
The solution to the housing shortage is.....to build more housing. 1/
First, it’s important to understand where the authors’ argument is coming from. The Open Markets Institute, like others on parts of the left, holds fighting business and particularly big business as its first priority intellectual commitment. 2/
Following from that, anything coded as deregulation in any form is viewed with hostility. When economic challenges arise, the instinct is to blame business and call for government power to be wielded against them on behalf of “the people.” That’s their MO. 3/
This is a common misconception about YIMBYs like me- that we have no theory of power in political economy. We actually do though. Or at least I do (I probably shouldn’t claim to speak for others).
Here’s my YIMBY theory of power. 1/
Lots of people, particularly more socialist + populist people, when they think about power in political economy think “who has power?” And that’s fair. But another way to think about power that’s especially relevant to housing is, “what kind of power do people have?” 2/
Too often in more NIMBY places, there’s way more “stop power” than “go power.”
Lots of people have the power to press the brake pedal. Discretionary review and “community input” are good examples.
Onerous zoning is in some sense very broad “stop power.” 3/
One major advantage of an 'Abundance Agenda' approach to economic policy is that it gets Democrats and 🇺🇸 away from zero-sum thinking. We are not each other’s enemies. We are all on Team 🇺🇸. The enemy is instead a series of invisible graveyards. @ATabarrok 1/6
The great enemy of the renter is not the landlord; it is the invisible graveyard of housing that a developer wanted to build but wasn’t allowed to. 2/6
The great barrier to climate action and affordability going together is not the everyday person putting gas in their car to get to work; it is the invisible graveyard of green energy projects that should have been built but were stymied by NIMBYism and red tape. 3/6
Some people think about Rome or WWII all the time. For me, it’s the Industrial Revolution. This is when humanity started to get so much more prosperous. It changed everything!
One key, underappreciated background ingredient in that was the weakening of guilds. Let me explain. 1/
Guilds were the ‘good ole boy’ networks of their day- associations of craftsmen/merchants that controlled their industry in their town. They controlled prices + managed training of new members via apprenticeships. They had huge economic + social power in early modern Europe. 2/
The guilds stifled innovation and economic growth by restricting competition, limiting the adoption of new technologies, and controlling the labor market. Their monopolistic practices and resistance to change badly hindered the flexibility and scale of production. 3/