Millennials: the immobile generation | Derek Thompson

Key Concepts:

1. The Affordability Election and Housing Crisis

The 2024 election was largely driven by affordability concerns, especially regarding housing.
Many Americans feel that the cost of living, particularly housing, has become unaffordable over the past few decades.
A significant percentage of Americans spend over 30% of their income on rent or mortgages.
The average age of first-time homebuyers has reached an all-time high, indicating the difficulty young people face in entering the housing market.
Young people, especially young men, are moving away from the Democratic party as a protest against the status quo.

2. The Decline of the American Dream

Historically, productive areas like San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York offered both wealth and housing opportunities.
The American Dream, defined as the ability to choose where to live and achieve upward mobility, has become fragmented.
People are now forced to choose between affordability (moving to less productive areas) and upward mobility (staying in expensive cities).
This is a "terrible" situation, as it forces people to choose between two essential aspects of the American Dream.

3. The Rise of NIMBYism and Restrictive Housing Policies

Over the past 50-60 years, cities have changed their approach to housing supply, leading to restrictions on development.
The proliferation of zoning, especially single-family zoning, and the rise of the NIMBY movement have played a significant role.
Neighbors have been empowered with legal tools to block new development, leading to a slowdown in construction in cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, and Boston.
The number of housing units permitted in California has steadily declined over the past 40 years.

4. Power Dynamics and Representation

Power is not solely about the rich versus the poor; it also manifests in subtler ways.
City council meetings regarding new developments are often dominated by older, wealthier homeowners who oppose construction due to concerns about construction, parking, detours, and property values.
The poor, unhoused, housing insecure, and young non-homeowners are often underrepresented in these discussions.
This represents a form of power where homeowners exert influence over non-homeowners.
This is analogous to corporate lobbying, where private interests override public interests.

5. Housing Abundance as Freedom

The goal is not to build skyscrapers everywhere but to provide people with the freedom to live where they choose.
If someone wants to live in the suburbs, they should have that option.
However, if someone wants to live in a city like San Francisco, or if they were born there and want to stay (e.g., teachers, firefighters), they should be able to afford it.
The current situation, where the middle class is forced to leave their birthplaces, is unacceptable.

6. The Tragedy of Good Intentions: Environmental Regulations

Environmental laws passed in the mid-20th century (e.g., Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, NEPA) were necessary to address pollution and environmental degradation.
However, these laws have inadvertently made it more difficult to build dense housing, add solar panels, and construct wind turbines.
Ironically, environmental laws now hinder environmental progress, as dense housing and clean energy are beneficial for the environment.
The solutions of one generation have become the problems of the next.

7. Institutional Renewal and the Need for Change

Every generation needs to re-evaluate and renew its institutions.
The current challenge is the inability to build, as liberalism has shifted from an ideology of building to one of blocking.
A new set of laws, customs, and rules is needed to make it easier to build densely, add clean energy, and enable government to build infrastructure efficiently.

8. Rules and Norms vs. Corporate Power

While the focus is often on rules and norms, corporate power and antitrust issues are also important.
The project aims to highlight issues that liberals may not be paying enough attention to.
The different housing outcomes in states like Texas and California cannot be solely attributed to oligarchy, monopoly, or income inequality.
Different rules and regulations are the primary drivers of these outcomes.

9. Conclusion

Liberals and progressives need to critically examine the rules and regulations they have co-created, as these can be bottlenecks to progress.
These rules are often within our power to change, as they were created and maintained through our own actions.
The focus on rules and norms is a strategic choice, as these are areas where we have the most direct influence.