13 Comments
Apr 5, 2021Liked by Marshall Auerback

Thank you for the explanation. The MSM long ago gave up reporting the actual news and moved to telling us what we're supposed to think which Patrick pointed out long ago but he was talking about the NYT. Unfortunately, what that means is that you can't rely on the media to tell you what's happening.

The fix for the US is simple - there has to be a penalty for offshoring work in the form of a tariff to bring it back into the country. Furthermore, the risk we have is not a spike in inflation but the kind of stagflation we saw in the '80s. The US has a staggering amount of debt and who's gonna buy it?

Expand full comment

Sadly, yours is an accurate take on the plan...particularly in regards to the actual lack of emphasis placed on truly revitalizing manufacturing or getting serious about making the R&D investments required to compete with China.

Perhaps most mystifying is the heavy emphasis on housing-related matters. Looking the past the undoubted absurdities of incorporating these in the plan, I think the utter pointless of these is best captured by Biden asking Congress to authorize a grant program that would provide funding to areas that eliminate exclusionary zoning laws. This demonstrates a near-total misunderstanding of the mentality of the folks supporting these laws. Quite simply, it is to prevent any (*ANY*) increase in the supply of housing on the market so as to provide permanent support for the appreciation of their own properties or the passive income they generate in rents. They will have no interest in any "grants" or whatever other "carrots" the Biden administration offers.

One other housing-related area that caught my eye was the rehab/retrofit provisions. Certainly it was designed to appeal to the Building Trades Unions. Members of the building trade unions remained a stalwart source of support for Pres. Trump in 2020 - even if the NABTU did ultimately back Biden. It should be mentioned that NABTU leadership is being very much pulled in two directions. Leadership, itself, is mindful that its membership is aging and they would very much like to swell their ranks and would welcome additional work with which to that. On the other hand, it's own greying membership would like to see the leadership keep its ranks as lean as possible - so as to guarantee higher hourly rates for its work. In any case, while much of this work does pay well - but these trades are suffering from a shortage of new workers. This is because the work is physically strenuous and has an attached social stigma (no doubt compounded by attitude of the modern democratic party staffed with James Carville-manufactured blowup dolls). So it must be said that more liberal immigration policies would help address these shortages. And that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Ultimately, the only saving grace of the plan is its sheer encumberances that arise from its many, ill-matched provisions. This suggests that it can be un-bundled into several smaller bills that can sink/swim on their own merits. It is somewhat encouraging that the GOP is not necessarily-against some of the infrastructure-related or R&D-related provisions. If the mammoth bill can be un-bundled there is perhaps some hope of a more meaningful and (gasp) bi-partisan jobs bill - but only if the GOP can keep its Cato Institute-huffing free-market fundamentalist wing at pay.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this explanation of what is shrouded in lots of optimism by main stream media.

The characterization "a dog's breakfast of neoliberlism and "woke " placebo says it all. It would have been so easy for them to give something to the family home care workers who I guess

are discarded because of little political clout.

Expand full comment

The parts on zoning (defacto caps on housing stock within a geographic area) are contradictory. According to the article they're causing price increases and homelessness but getting rid of them will cause price increases too.

Expand full comment

The suburbs are not a solution because of their ridiculous energy footprint. Single family homes have to be maintained. They are anti community. Property taxes have to paid. They are energy vampires. Transportation to and from them is wasteful. They waste materials. If you need medical assistance, good luck! In short a hole in the ground to pour your money(and societies)into. Medium density housing(no yards) and easily accessed services are the answers .In case you wander where I am coming from I live on a family farm in the middle of nowhere in a decent brick house(1300 sq.ft. upstairs 1300sq.ft.unfinished basement downstairs).I had to be a caregiver for my disabled parents and it was a logistical and emotional nightmare. I currently earn an income just at the poverty level in Kentucky. I suppose you could say that my case is extreme but my late neighbor came from the Atlanta suburbs and he told me that he didn't know his neighbors which indicates that the suburbs are a source of isolation too. The relationships in he suburbs and high density cities are mediated by materialism, alcohol, and drugs therefore shallow, vacuous, and narcissistic.

Expand full comment