Here's the theory-level question yimbies havent answered: why should 10 million ppl who want to be in, say, Boston for totally banal, horde-like reasons get to have a say about what the future shape of that city will be, rather than the people who own the city? What is yimbies' larger polticial theory which disfavors the preferences of owners (who want Boston kept "artificially" small and pricey) and favors the preferences of this vast abstract horde? I could see a communist answer to the question: the owners of the city should lose their ownership because they're now "historically obsolete"'...a state apparatus dominated by workers' organizations should grab all the land...etc etc etc. Sure. But last I checked, yimbies arent communists! They say they believe in capitalism. And if you're taking capitalist property rights seriously, then why arent you taking seriously owners' rights to do what they want with the physical environment that they own? If what owners want to do is pool political resources to set up zoning laws they like, then this is just spirit of capital doing its thing, isn't it? Since when does big capital not get to set anything up as exclusive? And BTW, in the "communist" version of the thought experiment, I am not sure the communist state would tear down historical Boston to put up giant housing boxes everywhere. Maybe they'd do that (producing the kinds of cities China has), or maybe they'd preserve it as some kind of "dialectical political symbol," like the Soviets did with St Petersburg (Petrograd) or Novgorod.

Counterpoint: One of the greatest American failures is that these soldiers weren't regularly being found face down in ditches over the next decade. x.com/Toddhairyballs/status/…

The “abundance agenda” promoted by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson is gaining traction among center-left Democrats, but it’s largely a rebranding of deregulation and market-first policies -- more Rockefeller Republican than progressive.

Move back to Oregon

Housing supply constraints do not seem to matter for house price and house quantity growth across US cities, from Schuyler Louie, John A. Mondragon, and @profwieland nber.org/papers/w33576 nber.org/papers/w33576

Saying that economic questions are not antitrust question is a deliberate attempt to hide and protect powerful corporations and monopolies. That's what Abundance really is, a smokescreen to hide the exercise of political and economic power.

Klein and Thompson are most blatantly trapped in scarcity when they talk about the magical qualities of SF and NYC and actually argue that our path depends on zoning reform in a few specific cities. What about the vibrant economy everywhere model? What about Milwaukee?

This was a very funny election in which the rich white elites were the good guys

What happened when the YIMBY movement took over Cambridge, Massachusetts trib.al/Q5nsEmW

.@zellnor4ny's platform offers nothing for tenants struggling to stay in their homes right now. Even worse, it undermines rent stabilization, giving landlords more ways to raise rents and push families out. 70% of New Yorkers rent — if you want our votes, freeze the rent.