Derek Thompson

I think the biggest difference between the essay and the book is the level of political critique. I think that in part, maybe due to my own personality, which is pathologically agreeable and seeking optimism wherever I can find it, I did not initially see this book as requiring the depth of of political critique of liberalism in the last 50 years that the book that we wrote has.

And I think that that critique is utterly necessary to understand the problems of the last 50 years and how to fix them. I mean, just to pivot off of your point about the degree to which Ralph Nader and the legalism of the 1960s and 1970s changed the character of liberalism, and in many ways defined the character of modern liberalism, There's a great line from, what is this, page 89 of the book.

And I think that that critique is utterly necessary to understand the problems of the last 50 years and how to fix them. I mean, just to pivot off of your point about the degree to which Ralph Nader and the legalism of the 1960s and 1970s changed the character of liberalism, and in many ways defined the character of modern liberalism, There's a great line from, what is this, page 89 of the book.

This is in the chapter that we have about energy and the way that liberals have gotten in their own way in terms of building precisely what they want to build, say clean energy like solar and wind. The PBS news anchor, Jim Lehrer, once asked Ralph Nader why he was qualified to be president in 2000. And Nader could have said, no one can make government work better than me.

This is in the chapter that we have about energy and the way that liberals have gotten in their own way in terms of building precisely what they want to build, say clean energy like solar and wind. The PBS news anchor, Jim Lehrer, once asked Ralph Nader why he was qualified to be president in 2000. And Nader could have said, no one can make government work better than me.

No one is better at understanding how to make government effective than me. But he didn't say that. What he said is, quote, I don't know anybody who has sued more agencies and departments. there was this idea, this identity of liberalism that said that the way to prove that you're a good progressive is to stop governments and businesses from changing the physical world.

No one is better at understanding how to make government effective than me. But he didn't say that. What he said is, quote, I don't know anybody who has sued more agencies and departments. there was this idea, this identity of liberalism that said that the way to prove that you're a good progressive is to stop governments and businesses from changing the physical world.

And maybe that was, in some places, a responsible... response to the environmental degradation of the middle of the 20th century. But now that our problems aren't what can we stop building, but rather what have we stopped building? The houses and the solar farms and the wind turbines. We need to have an identity shift.

And maybe that was, in some places, a responsible... response to the environmental degradation of the middle of the 20th century. But now that our problems aren't what can we stop building, but rather what have we stopped building? The houses and the solar farms and the wind turbines. We need to have an identity shift.

from a liberalism that's proud of suing government to a liberalism that's proud of making government actually work. Sabin has a great line in the book Public Citizens that you were calling out where he says in the 1960s, 1970s, quote, it was as if liberals took a bicycle apart to fix it, but never quite figured out how to get it running properly again. And in many ways, I never thought of

from a liberalism that's proud of suing government to a liberalism that's proud of making government actually work. Sabin has a great line in the book Public Citizens that you were calling out where he says in the 1960s, 1970s, quote, it was as if liberals took a bicycle apart to fix it, but never quite figured out how to get it running properly again. And in many ways, I never thought of

The book project emerging from the abundance agenda is being a book project about identifying the ways that liberalism took the bicycle apart. But I think it's really important to figure out how liberalism took the bicycle apart if, in fact, we're going to get it properly running again.

The book project emerging from the abundance agenda is being a book project about identifying the ways that liberalism took the bicycle apart. But I think it's really important to figure out how liberalism took the bicycle apart if, in fact, we're going to get it properly running again.

To dive into the book itself, there's any number of ways that a book about liberalism and the future of politics could begin. You could start with culture. You could start with taxes and redistributive welfare policies. We start with housing.

To dive into the book itself, there's any number of ways that a book about liberalism and the future of politics could begin. You could start with culture. You could start with taxes and redistributive welfare policies. We start with housing.

Our first big chapter is about housing, the problem of rising housing prices, and the problem of constraints on housing construction in many of the places where people most want to live, like San Francisco. Why is housing so foundational to your sense of this project?

Our first big chapter is about housing, the problem of rising housing prices, and the problem of constraints on housing construction in many of the places where people most want to live, like San Francisco. Why is housing so foundational to your sense of this project?

Thank you.

Thank you.

There are a lot of conceptual tensions in this book that I think are very important. Scarcity versus abundance being one of them.