Search Google

6/29/15

Do conservatives have anything to say about cities?

Democrats do better electorally where it’s crowded, Republicans where it’s less so. The greater the population density, the bluer a state, region, or city. And that’s too bad, argue Michael Hendrix and Andrew Evans in National Affairs, because “the result of this electoral reality is that Republicans rarely control the levers of power in some of the areas with the most people and greatest economic vitality.”

A more important result is that one-party, Democratic dominance means these cities are often closed to disruptive forces that could help them more fully unleash their economic potential:

As a result of decades of Democratic governance and misplaced priorities, however, American cities do not offer the opportunities for success and growth that they should, especially for those looking to climb the socio-economic ladder. In many cases, city governments are utterly dysfunctional. And the reason for this dysfunction is that our cities are too often closed — closed to businesses and closed to outsiders. For the middle class and those striving to make it up the ladder, the taxes, housing, and other costs leave cities simply too expensive to afford — especially with a family. Excessive regulation makes it difficult, if not downright impossible, to get the permits necessary to start a business. Cronyism and a lack of transparency make it difficult to know whether anyone is trying to fix the situation. The reality is that American cities — with their insufficient affordability and poor governance — suffer from a profound lack of opportunity and a surplus of problems.

Cities are important, both for the millions who live in them and the economic growth they generate for the nation as a whole. “Cities,” says Richard Florida, “spur the mixing and mingling of talented people that lead to technological inventions and the formation of entrepreneurial enterprises.” And when that mixing process is working right, everyone benefits. Research from Enrico Moretti has found that for each new innovation-job in a city, five additional jobs are created. “For each new software designer hired at Twitter in San Francisco, there are five new job openings for baristas, personal trainers, therapists and taxi drivers, ” Moretti wrote in the Wall Street Journal back in 2013.

Hendrix and Evans wants to deregulate cities to open them up to new workers, to new entrepreneurs big and small, and to more transparency and accountability. They want to make it easier to build housing, get a business permit, see online what your city government is up to. “Since cities are closed, conservatives should seek to make them open,” Hendrix and Evans write. That word, “open,” is an important one, argues Scott Beyer of the Market Urbanism blog in post about the the Hendrix and Evans essay, because it inverts political stereotypes. Beyer:

At the national level, Democrats are portrayed as the open and tolerant ones, and Republicans as the reactionary ones trying to uphold the status quo. These distinctions have been established largely because of the parties’ differing approach to social issues. But this is hardly applicable to cities, where issues are rooted more in economics and quality-of-life. A large number of urbanites—whether they want to call themselves liberals, progressives, or Democrats—are in fact quite reactionary themselves, a point emphasized by the authors. Housing regulations have been used by the urban left to restrict new construction, as if city neighborhoods are gated country clubs that should never allow change or new people. The liberal business elite have fortified the business permitting process so much that, in many cities, it is nearly-impossible for competing entrepreneurs to enter basic professions like hair-styling. And to carve out a voting bloc, the left has defended unionized public monopolies that deliver services at far higher cost, and less efficiency, than is necessary.

Some some possible elements of an urban agenda that come to mind: housing deregulation, charter schools, prison reform, occupational licensing reform, expanded income supports …

By the way, a few other posts on the housing issue:

We need to make it easier for US workers to get to where the good jobs are

That Financial Times study on US income inequality and housing totally misses the point

 Some smart thoughts on housing, jobs, and economic growth

— How government housing policy worsens inequality and harms economic growth

Venture capitalist Sam Altman of Y Combinator on how to boost US innovation and growth



from AEI » Latest Content http://ift.tt/1C2wxMh

0 التعليقات:

Post a Comment

Search Google

Blog Archive