Probably one of the most interesting critiques of the abundance book I’ve seen. A few thoughts:
I think the housing issue often times get focused on super star cities and glosses over the fact housing has become a problem almost *everywhere*. Reality is, across-the-board, with the exception of a few metros, housing has become ever pressin…
Probably one of the most interesting critiques of the abundance book I’ve seen. A few thoughts:
I think the housing issue often times get focused on super star cities and glosses over the fact housing has become a problem almost *everywhere*. Reality is, across-the-board, with the exception of a few metros, housing has become ever pressing concern for Americans, no matter where they live.
The large idea behind abundance is that we should be able to provide meaningful options to Americans across the board. Reality is, that’s not happening in rural and smaller places. They often lack critical infrastructure, access to healthcare and good education that would be a huge proponent for people to stay in these areas. If you want these areas to succeed, you have to have a government that is effective in working to deliver these basic goods so that people can choose to stay.
I agree that abundance needs to be widespread and diffused. It’s one of the strengths of the American economy that different regions have fierce competition with each other. A recognition of this benefit started with inflation reduction act and the CHIPs and Science Act, where the Biden administration worked with Republicans to invest in many the left behind places. However, a core issue with the government has been that it’s too bogged down by bureaucracy to actually deliver on some of these material gains. If you want more places to be developed and have opportunities you need to have an effective government that can really deliver those things.
Finally, I think culture pays an important part here. Most Americans *dont* want to live in mega cities. They often pressured too because of jobs. The government can play a crucial hand and making sure that people who want to stay in smaller places can, but it needs to be effective at doing so. We should all care about a government that is quick, lean, and responsive to the needs other people
Rural areas, in general, don’t really need a lot of infrastructure, since most is private. You have well and septic instead of public water and sewer. Starlink has made the issue of broadband access largely moot.
We have had universal availability of electric for a long time. Healthcare can be an issue depending on location - ditto schools - but many rural areas are within a reasonable distance of good doctors, and schools are often quite decent, and can be supplemented.
Most of the federal efforts for rural areas seem pretty ineffective. While they planned for years on broadband without deploying, actual rural people signed up for Starlink.
I’m glad that doesn’t match your own observation, but data after data consistently shows that people who live in small towns, rural areas and exurbs, have consistently lower access to healthcare, education and infrastructure. It’s why people have been leaving for the last 50 years!
“Most of the federal effort for rural areas seem pretty ineffective” but that is the central argument of abundance: federal efforts should be effective so people can live wherever they want! We should demand that our government work! Indeed the electrification of rural areas and post office deliveries only happened because the government *was* effective. To this day private companies opt of rural/exurb places because they deem them too expensive; the government often has to step in
That really isn’t quite what the data shows. Exurbs in general do not have many issues re healthcare, education, and infrastructure. In fact, several of the exurbs showing greatest growth in Virginia have among the highest average incomes in Virginia, including Goochland County, Albemarle County, Fauquier County, and James City County. All are rural looking counties that are outside of city centers but within driving distance of them.
Remote small towns and remote rural areas have different issues than small cities, exurban areas, college towns and recreational areas.
Probably one of the most interesting critiques of the abundance book I’ve seen. A few thoughts:
I think the housing issue often times get focused on super star cities and glosses over the fact housing has become a problem almost *everywhere*. Reality is, across-the-board, with the exception of a few metros, housing has become ever pressing concern for Americans, no matter where they live.
The large idea behind abundance is that we should be able to provide meaningful options to Americans across the board. Reality is, that’s not happening in rural and smaller places. They often lack critical infrastructure, access to healthcare and good education that would be a huge proponent for people to stay in these areas. If you want these areas to succeed, you have to have a government that is effective in working to deliver these basic goods so that people can choose to stay.
I agree that abundance needs to be widespread and diffused. It’s one of the strengths of the American economy that different regions have fierce competition with each other. A recognition of this benefit started with inflation reduction act and the CHIPs and Science Act, where the Biden administration worked with Republicans to invest in many the left behind places. However, a core issue with the government has been that it’s too bogged down by bureaucracy to actually deliver on some of these material gains. If you want more places to be developed and have opportunities you need to have an effective government that can really deliver those things.
Finally, I think culture pays an important part here. Most Americans *dont* want to live in mega cities. They often pressured too because of jobs. The government can play a crucial hand and making sure that people who want to stay in smaller places can, but it needs to be effective at doing so. We should all care about a government that is quick, lean, and responsive to the needs other people
That really does not match my own observation, and I live in one of the formerly rural, very rapidly growing exurbs that has been affected by post-pandemic population shifts. Housing shortages appear to be primarily a relatively few areas and a big question of affordability on the low end. See https://news.ku.edu/news/article/study-finds-us-does-not-have-housing-shortage-but-shortage-of-affordable-housing
Rural areas, in general, don’t really need a lot of infrastructure, since most is private. You have well and septic instead of public water and sewer. Starlink has made the issue of broadband access largely moot.
We have had universal availability of electric for a long time. Healthcare can be an issue depending on location - ditto schools - but many rural areas are within a reasonable distance of good doctors, and schools are often quite decent, and can be supplemented.
Most of the federal efforts for rural areas seem pretty ineffective. While they planned for years on broadband without deploying, actual rural people signed up for Starlink.
I’m glad that doesn’t match your own observation, but data after data consistently shows that people who live in small towns, rural areas and exurbs, have consistently lower access to healthcare, education and infrastructure. It’s why people have been leaving for the last 50 years!
“Most of the federal effort for rural areas seem pretty ineffective” but that is the central argument of abundance: federal efforts should be effective so people can live wherever they want! We should demand that our government work! Indeed the electrification of rural areas and post office deliveries only happened because the government *was* effective. To this day private companies opt of rural/exurb places because they deem them too expensive; the government often has to step in
That really isn’t quite what the data shows. Exurbs in general do not have many issues re healthcare, education, and infrastructure. In fact, several of the exurbs showing greatest growth in Virginia have among the highest average incomes in Virginia, including Goochland County, Albemarle County, Fauquier County, and James City County. All are rural looking counties that are outside of city centers but within driving distance of them.
Remote small towns and remote rural areas have different issues than small cities, exurban areas, college towns and recreational areas.
Census data does not show a continuing exodus of rural residents, but rather the opposite in recent years. See https://www.coopercenter.org/research/remote-work-persists-migration-continues-rural-america from UVa’s Cooper Center.
This reversal has come largely from remote work, e-commerce, and near-ubiquitous availability of satellite Internet.