This is the first time I’ve read someone articulate the “stasis subsidy” argument. It’s a particular framework for thinking about these issues that hadn’t occurred to me, I must confess. But it’s an insightful and elegant way to analyze the US right now. Noah, this is an incredibly powerful article. Thanks. (Would make an interesting book.)
I've visited the USA 3 or 4 times over the years and the condition of essential infrastructure is, in places, very poor and in urgent need of replacing.
I'm sure this is an important impediment to some things, most obviously housing. But people always talk about the terrible shape of our roads, bridges, rail etc. The failure to maintain this basic stuff can't be the fault of NIMBYs since it's there already.
On another NIMBY point, America is still a largely empty country, and our built environment is pretty ugly. That opens up huge tracts of land to build either greenfield projects/communities or build over the decrepit strip malls and fast food chains that litter all the outskirts of our communities. I can't see any appreciable NIMBY resistance to either of these. But instead progressives keep pushing to build these things in the densest, most expensive areas, the ones that have the means to fund strong resistance. Focus on building a new Phoenix, not a symbolic victory of building cheap housing in Greenwich or wind farm off of Martha's Vineyard.
For once, Noah, I agree with you 100%. And I have a quote for you: "From December 1941 to September 1945 is 4 years. In those 4 years, we defeated Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan. Today it takes 17 years to add a 5th runway to the Atlanta airport. We are simply not prepared to be a serious country anymore."
Those words were spoken more than 15 years ago by Newt Gingrich, in a speech in Atlanta. I found the quote so unbelievable that I checked it. It's fairly accurate: the first Environmental Assessment is from the early 90's; constructions started in 2002; the runway opened in 2006. Whether it's 12 years or 17... it's way too long to build a necessary and basic public transportation amenity.
I served on the local Planning Commission for Elk Grove, CA (pop approx 150K) from 2006-2014. I can attest that you and Gingrich are correct: we are no longer prepared to be serious about building anything. Boilerplate "environmental impact" statements utterly devoid of useful content but costing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce will kill a tree each time they're printed. I used to think this was just being extra-careful, then I saw how the sausage was made. Now I think they're basically make-work for environmentalists who can't get a real job. They're not the only ones though. Union leaders use CEQA (CA's Clean Air / Water Act) to delay any non-union project in environmental litigation for years. It's not about the environment; it's extortion. The moment the developer signs a union-scale, project labor agreement, the lawsuits vanish. The NIMBYism (from both Left and Right) is small potatoes compared to this sort of thing.
God help us if we had to actually tool up for a war. Can't you see it already: "sorry, we can't build battleships because the construction might hurt the endangered sea turtles". I like sea turtles and spotted owls and CA condors too, but at some point, the needs of people factor into the equation. Right now, they pretty much don't.
BTW: Don't tell any of your more lefty friends that you agree with Gingrich about something. They might vote you off the island.
I was at a dinner with some family who live in western Massachusetts about a year ago. Two items for your consideration.
First, the region had recently voted down a natural gas pipeline proposed to run through the area. Shortly after, the local gas utility started denying all requests for additional connections to the distribution network. This was widely interpreted as corporate retribution instead of, you know, basically fucking Newtonian physics.
Second, the town was considering a repeal of some ordinance that gave property owners effective veto rights over what adjacent property owners did with their, you know, property. I said something to the effect of, "If you want to be sure their construction doesn't impact your quality of life, build further back from your property line," and they looked at me like I was Donald Trump's own asshole. True story.
And you know, these people are liberal as the day is long on the summer solstice, but you're a fool if you think conservatives don't pull the same. Make of that what you will. I personally think America had it coming.
I'm trying to figure out the galaxy brain take that's something along the lines of getting exclusionary zoning declared a hazardous environmental contamination and thus declaring obstructionist policies a valid target of Superfund remediation.... ;)
We had to move from a wonderful neighborhood that was completely destroyed as student housing for the university expanded in to our neighborhood. Most of the students were perfectly fine and sincerely welcomed. But a minority of students insisted on loud parties in their front yard until 4am. When such a party house moved in both just behind us and right next door we finally had to bail and run. Sure, we talked to these neighbors, and their landlords, and the police. Nobody did anything. So if you want to hear a real rant, just keep writing about that. :-)
There must be a natural law to bureaucracy where the more people you have working in an organisation the harder and harder it becomes to get anything done. Everyone knows that the infrastructure is crumbling and you’d think the Ohio train disaster would wake up legislators and civil servants and yet, still nothing gets done.
Feb 27, 2023·edited Feb 27, 2023Liked by Noah Smith
I agree with this post but not every one of its points. E.g., "Meanwhile, across the USA, housing is just not getting built."
I'm not sure this is true, especially for the kind of housing all right-thinking YIMBYs care about: multi-unit construction, especially buildings with 5+ units. That's going up, a lot. Starts are at their highest point since the mid-1980s (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST5F). And when you look at what's in the pipeline -- multi-family units currently under construction -- that's at the highest point since the 1970s, when the huge Boomer generation was just starting to build households (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNDCON5MUSA).
What has only seen a very small increase is new starts of duplexes/triplexes/fourplexes (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNDCON24USA). For whatever reason, these have fallen out of fashion and are being eclipsed by construction of much larger apartment/condo buildings.
What we're seeing instead is a dramatic pullback on the number of starts of *single family homes* (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST1F). And that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Feb 28, 2023·edited Mar 6, 2023Liked by Noah Smith
My favorite post yet. The only way out is innovation in atoms, to bypass the regulatory framework and start anew. Self-flying personal cars will change the way we live. It has the potential to fix the transportation and housing problem by enabling short commutes and affordable living far away from the city centers. Unfortunately, we are a good 20 years away from personal flying cars because of battery tech. I wish we could improve upon the current situation, but I think opinions are too entrenched and won’t change without some sort of calamity.. but we can always innovate our way out of it!
This is an example of the tragedy of the anticommons.
From Wikipedia:
"The tragedy of the anticommons is a type of coordination breakdown, in which a commons does not emerge, even when general access to resources or infrastructure would be a social good. It is a mirror-image of the older concept of tragedy of the commons... The "tragedy of the anticommons" covers a range of coordination failures, including patent thickets and submarine patents. Overcoming these breakdowns can be difficult, but there are assorted means, including eminent domain, laches, patent pools, or other licensing organizations."
Essentially, the tragedy of the anticommons means there are too many rights holders and they cannot come to agreement. Much regulation, including zoning and environmental law, creates more rights holders.
The classic Chinese examples are the "nail houses".
Minor quibble: "2/3 of Americans who owns a home" is wrong: 2/3 of households are owner occupied. Any solution that removes net value to the owners will be vigorously opposed for simple pocketbook reasons. Which is why they fight so vigourously with and for zoning.
Boston's "Big Dig" project successfully solved such problems, but at an enormous cost: it was the most expensive highway project of its sort ever. It did so by settling with every stakeholder: no use of eminent domain.
A legislative solution might involve recognizing the values of the overlapping rights, pricing violations of those rights above those values, and allowing specific high-priority projects to simply pay for them (as eminent domain does) without entering the very slow tort system.
"Ikiru" is a brilliant Japanese film by Kurosawa that illustrates overcoming a number of such issues on a very small scale. I'm sure you've seen it, Noah. I don't usually like tearjerkers, but this one is great.
Breaking the backs of the NIMBYs and stomping them into the dust is needed if America is to remain competitive. The UK didn’t do that and now it gets to enter a not-so-genteel decline.
This is the first time I’ve read someone articulate the “stasis subsidy” argument. It’s a particular framework for thinking about these issues that hadn’t occurred to me, I must confess. But it’s an insightful and elegant way to analyze the US right now. Noah, this is an incredibly powerful article. Thanks. (Would make an interesting book.)
It’s the #1 thing holding back more economic growth and prosperity in the country.
It’s and insane unforced error.
The US will never compete with China with our short sightedness and inability to build.
It’s lunacy.
Defeating the NIMBYs and the NIMBY mindset will be one of the most important tasks of this generation.
Much much more support and amplification of this message is needed Noah (and friends).
Help!
I've visited the USA 3 or 4 times over the years and the condition of essential infrastructure is, in places, very poor and in urgent need of replacing.
I'm sure this is an important impediment to some things, most obviously housing. But people always talk about the terrible shape of our roads, bridges, rail etc. The failure to maintain this basic stuff can't be the fault of NIMBYs since it's there already.
On another NIMBY point, America is still a largely empty country, and our built environment is pretty ugly. That opens up huge tracts of land to build either greenfield projects/communities or build over the decrepit strip malls and fast food chains that litter all the outskirts of our communities. I can't see any appreciable NIMBY resistance to either of these. But instead progressives keep pushing to build these things in the densest, most expensive areas, the ones that have the means to fund strong resistance. Focus on building a new Phoenix, not a symbolic victory of building cheap housing in Greenwich or wind farm off of Martha's Vineyard.
The cost of “build nothing” also shows up in demographics. I know many people who would have more children if not for extreme housing costs.
For once, Noah, I agree with you 100%. And I have a quote for you: "From December 1941 to September 1945 is 4 years. In those 4 years, we defeated Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan. Today it takes 17 years to add a 5th runway to the Atlanta airport. We are simply not prepared to be a serious country anymore."
Those words were spoken more than 15 years ago by Newt Gingrich, in a speech in Atlanta. I found the quote so unbelievable that I checked it. It's fairly accurate: the first Environmental Assessment is from the early 90's; constructions started in 2002; the runway opened in 2006. Whether it's 12 years or 17... it's way too long to build a necessary and basic public transportation amenity.
I served on the local Planning Commission for Elk Grove, CA (pop approx 150K) from 2006-2014. I can attest that you and Gingrich are correct: we are no longer prepared to be serious about building anything. Boilerplate "environmental impact" statements utterly devoid of useful content but costing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce will kill a tree each time they're printed. I used to think this was just being extra-careful, then I saw how the sausage was made. Now I think they're basically make-work for environmentalists who can't get a real job. They're not the only ones though. Union leaders use CEQA (CA's Clean Air / Water Act) to delay any non-union project in environmental litigation for years. It's not about the environment; it's extortion. The moment the developer signs a union-scale, project labor agreement, the lawsuits vanish. The NIMBYism (from both Left and Right) is small potatoes compared to this sort of thing.
God help us if we had to actually tool up for a war. Can't you see it already: "sorry, we can't build battleships because the construction might hurt the endangered sea turtles". I like sea turtles and spotted owls and CA condors too, but at some point, the needs of people factor into the equation. Right now, they pretty much don't.
BTW: Don't tell any of your more lefty friends that you agree with Gingrich about something. They might vote you off the island.
I was at a dinner with some family who live in western Massachusetts about a year ago. Two items for your consideration.
First, the region had recently voted down a natural gas pipeline proposed to run through the area. Shortly after, the local gas utility started denying all requests for additional connections to the distribution network. This was widely interpreted as corporate retribution instead of, you know, basically fucking Newtonian physics.
Second, the town was considering a repeal of some ordinance that gave property owners effective veto rights over what adjacent property owners did with their, you know, property. I said something to the effect of, "If you want to be sure their construction doesn't impact your quality of life, build further back from your property line," and they looked at me like I was Donald Trump's own asshole. True story.
And you know, these people are liberal as the day is long on the summer solstice, but you're a fool if you think conservatives don't pull the same. Make of that what you will. I personally think America had it coming.
I'm trying to figure out the galaxy brain take that's something along the lines of getting exclusionary zoning declared a hazardous environmental contamination and thus declaring obstructionist policies a valid target of Superfund remediation.... ;)
We had to move from a wonderful neighborhood that was completely destroyed as student housing for the university expanded in to our neighborhood. Most of the students were perfectly fine and sincerely welcomed. But a minority of students insisted on loud parties in their front yard until 4am. When such a party house moved in both just behind us and right next door we finally had to bail and run. Sure, we talked to these neighbors, and their landlords, and the police. Nobody did anything. So if you want to hear a real rant, just keep writing about that. :-)
There must be a natural law to bureaucracy where the more people you have working in an organisation the harder and harder it becomes to get anything done. Everyone knows that the infrastructure is crumbling and you’d think the Ohio train disaster would wake up legislators and civil servants and yet, still nothing gets done.
I agree with this post but not every one of its points. E.g., "Meanwhile, across the USA, housing is just not getting built."
I'm not sure this is true, especially for the kind of housing all right-thinking YIMBYs care about: multi-unit construction, especially buildings with 5+ units. That's going up, a lot. Starts are at their highest point since the mid-1980s (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST5F). And when you look at what's in the pipeline -- multi-family units currently under construction -- that's at the highest point since the 1970s, when the huge Boomer generation was just starting to build households (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNDCON5MUSA).
What has only seen a very small increase is new starts of duplexes/triplexes/fourplexes (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNDCON24USA). For whatever reason, these have fallen out of fashion and are being eclipsed by construction of much larger apartment/condo buildings.
What we're seeing instead is a dramatic pullback on the number of starts of *single family homes* (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST1F). And that's not necessarily a bad thing.
The kind of article I love most from Noah- unexpected topic, explanation why it matters and a cool name to visualize the problem
My favorite post yet. The only way out is innovation in atoms, to bypass the regulatory framework and start anew. Self-flying personal cars will change the way we live. It has the potential to fix the transportation and housing problem by enabling short commutes and affordable living far away from the city centers. Unfortunately, we are a good 20 years away from personal flying cars because of battery tech. I wish we could improve upon the current situation, but I think opinions are too entrenched and won’t change without some sort of calamity.. but we can always innovate our way out of it!
Excellent article! This is a very similar situation in Canada.
This is an example of the tragedy of the anticommons.
From Wikipedia:
"The tragedy of the anticommons is a type of coordination breakdown, in which a commons does not emerge, even when general access to resources or infrastructure would be a social good. It is a mirror-image of the older concept of tragedy of the commons... The "tragedy of the anticommons" covers a range of coordination failures, including patent thickets and submarine patents. Overcoming these breakdowns can be difficult, but there are assorted means, including eminent domain, laches, patent pools, or other licensing organizations."
Essentially, the tragedy of the anticommons means there are too many rights holders and they cannot come to agreement. Much regulation, including zoning and environmental law, creates more rights holders.
The classic Chinese examples are the "nail houses".
Minor quibble: "2/3 of Americans who owns a home" is wrong: 2/3 of households are owner occupied. Any solution that removes net value to the owners will be vigorously opposed for simple pocketbook reasons. Which is why they fight so vigourously with and for zoning.
Boston's "Big Dig" project successfully solved such problems, but at an enormous cost: it was the most expensive highway project of its sort ever. It did so by settling with every stakeholder: no use of eminent domain.
A legislative solution might involve recognizing the values of the overlapping rights, pricing violations of those rights above those values, and allowing specific high-priority projects to simply pay for them (as eminent domain does) without entering the very slow tort system.
"Ikiru" is a brilliant Japanese film by Kurosawa that illustrates overcoming a number of such issues on a very small scale. I'm sure you've seen it, Noah. I don't usually like tearjerkers, but this one is great.
Breaking the backs of the NIMBYs and stomping them into the dust is needed if America is to remain competitive. The UK didn’t do that and now it gets to enter a not-so-genteel decline.