all their 'solutions' are market based. China's success no matter what certain liberals claim is because of the role the state played in it's economy, not because of markets.

housing? deregulate so private developers (hopefully) build shittier homes. the entire thing relies on private sector's willingness to build homes. and even if homes are built, supply can be manipulated and prices can be set by developers because there is no such thing as a free market.

a state owned enterprise for building homes and selling it at below market rates is impossible to imagine for them.

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 1 month ago (2 children)

No they do not want to learn from China.

They want to get rid of zoning and unleash the power of the free market.

The free market has already shown that it has no interest in creating abundance because abundance reduces the rate of profit. Developers will not create abundance, they will create more niche market segments and build artificial scarcity because that's what markets do and have always done.

From a political standpoint, it's a completely losing angle. The places where zoning exists are all dominated by home owners, so none of the abundance Democrats will win elections in those districts. The places dominated by renters, urban centers, are already voting for Democrats so essentially the abundance message will cost the Ds the exact demographic they need to win more seats to effect the change they want. It's a politically bad move.

[–] Pathfinder@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If you “leave it to the free market”, you will just get further sprawl of single family homes; Los Angeles-ifying the rest of the country. Maybe at best sprinkle in some paper mache five-over-ones in there. The US does need more, denser housing, but will never be provided by the free market.

The actual “Chinese” solution would be to take genuinely blighted areas of a place like Detroit, build very dense, affordable public housing, provide tons of services and public transportation, and ensure local residents get priority. It would be a solution everyone would love, better than Americans could possibly imagine, but the idea that this could be done by the free market strains credulity.

Edit: kicking myself for missing the bigger point in my original comment. In China housing is largely decommodified, it’s something to ensure everyone has. Meanwhile housing in the US is a speculative asset driven by exchange values first and a use value second. Of course there is a speculative element in Chinese real estate but it is not primary. This is a direct result of socialist vs capitalist relations. Since changing THAT isn’t on the table, the US cannot do what China is doing.

[–] NewDark@hexbear.net 11 points 1 month ago

You should see how much Ezra Klein has trouble keeping up with Sam Sedar's basic line of inquiry about it. It's pretty telling.

[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 20 points 1 month ago

Shit message that will fail to resonate

They'll try anything besides universal healthcare and state owned enterprise

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 1 month ago

[–] LaGG_3@hexbear.net 13 points 1 month ago

Repackaged YIMBYism

[–] davel@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 1 month ago

just one more deregulation bro. i promise bro just one more deregulation and it’ll fix everything bro. bro… just one more deregulation. please just one more.

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Listen to bad faith podcast. Brianna breaks it down and puts a bow on it:

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 1 month ago

Bad Faith Premium Feed: Episode 478 - The Abundance Conspiracy (w/ Sandeep Vaheesan, Isabella Weber, & Aaron Regunberg)

Episode webpage: https://www.patreon.com/posts/episode-478-w-130189560

Media file: https://c10.patreonusercontent.com/4/patreon-media/p/post/130189560/a95bf090d8f9421bba670161b95423ec/eyJhIjoxLCJwIjoxfQ%3D%3D/1.mp3?token-hash=MT531CycW66dm4wUEk7ZWx92mx0HcobJqZ_Yaa7A9Qc%3D&token-time=1749427200

[–] some_guy 1 points 1 month ago

I got tired of her inability to wrap her mind around arguments she didn’t agree with. She refuses to make the leap to see them from the point of view of the other party. It was tiring. I continued listening for a couple of years after she debased herself when interviewing Talia Lavin, which was pretty despicable, but it became an exercise in frustration. But she’s mostly got good politics, so anyone who enjoys her show is ok in my book.

[–] An_ominous_mist@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 month ago

abundeeznuts

[–] some_guy 1 points 1 month ago

Dems are rudderless. Again.