Obama’s Friends: Enemies of the American Dream?

iStock_000003624419XSmall.jpg

President Barack Obama has rightly spoken positively about the American Dream, how it is becoming more expensive and how it needs to be reclaimed. But to do this, he may have to disregard many of those who have been among his strongest supporters and the dense urban centers which have been his strongest bastion of support.

Indeed, the American Dream has been achieved by countless millions of households, though many have been left out of this expansion that began following World War II. Home ownership has risen from little above 40 percent to nearly 70 percent. Automobile ownership has become nearly universal, making it possible for urban areas to grown to unprecedented size. The Brookings Institution, the Progressive Policy Institute and others have published studies showing that people in low income households are far more likely to find and hold employment if they have access to cars.

All of this has been associated with a democratization of prosperity that has never before occurred. Per capita income is now 3.5 times its 1950 level in the United States (see 1929-2007 inflation adjusted data).

Yet, the American Dream is under serious threat – and this predates today’s faltering economy. A key component lies in the machinations of an urban policy and planning elite contemptuous of the comfortable lifestyles achieved by so many Americans. Instead they propose creating an environment in which households would have to pay more for their houses and spend more of their lives traveling from one place to another.

Most of those who wish to create this situation come from the political left and consider themselves to be “friends of Obama.” They have achieved positions of power in some urban areas, such as throughout California, Portland, Seattle and a host of other areas. As early as 2007 some saw Obama as the dream candidate – what one called “a smart growth President”.

This elite group starts by demonizing the very foundations of America’s inclusive prosperity. Having declared “urban sprawl” a scourge, they seek to stop further development on the urban fringe and want virtually all development to be within already developed urban footprints. These and other overly stringent regulations have served to strangle urban land markets, forcing land prices and housing prices higher, in those region where they have been imposed.

Over fifteen years ago William Fischell at Dartmouth University demonstrated that California’s overly restrictive land use policies had made that state more expensive than elsewhere. Since 2000, with the wider availability of mortgage credit, the new demand drove prices to double or triple historic norms in areas with restrictive regulation. Price reductions have lowered prices, but they are still well above historic norms. This means that fewer households still are able to own their own homes in areas with restrictive land use regulations. Once normal prosperity is restored, the higher house prices of the restrictive land use areas can be expected to resume their increase relative to the rest of the nation.

This is a problem for some regions now. But many planners are enthusiastic about Obama in part because he is thought to be sympathetic to recreating these conditions throughout the entire country.

###

The automobile plays the role of the Great Satan in this morality play. The goal of many ‘progressive’ urbanists is to force people into transit and stop road building. Transit, of course, has its place. There is no better way to get to your job south of 59th Street in Manhattan, to Chicago’s Loop or to a few other of the nation’s largest downtown areas. But the stark reality is that transit can not substitute for the automobile for the overwhelming majority of trips, except for these niche markets. Further, failing to expand highways to keep up with traffic growth increases traffic congestion (and air pollution) and reduces economic productivity (read: “increases poverty”).

Higher costs for home ownership and slower commutes to work – and they will be slower because transit commutes average twice as long as automobile – impose significant burdens on people. Fewer people will have houses and fewer will have jobs. Forcing a single parent to take longer to navigate from home to the day care center to the job, whether by transit or by car, makes life more difficult – and for no rational reason. It is the equivalent of forcing people to work harder for nothing.

Of course, this way of thinking has been around some parts of the country for decades. The new drive to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has extended its reach. The typical formulation now is that in order to reduce GHG emissions, Americans need to be crowded into dense urban areas and give up our cars.

###

In reality, nothing of the kind is required. “Green” houses are being developed that can make it possible to substantially reduce GHG emissions while Americans continue their favored suburban life styles (the lifestyles, by the way, also favored by Europeans and Japanese). Hybrid and other advanced car and fuel technologies can make it possible for the personal transportation sector to achieve massive long term GHG reductions. The answer is regulating emissions, rather than people.

But the planning and urbanist lobbies may not fundamentally be driven by the perceived need to reduce GHGs. They would rather regulate people, just as was the case well before climate change was even on the political agenda.

Of course, the planners don’t see their strategies as nightmarish. They have worked them all out theoretically in their heads. The problem is that the theory is not and cannot be translated into reality. There is no more comfortable place to live in the world for people – particularly those past their youthful and single years – than the American suburb. There are no metropolitan areas of similar size in the world where people spend less time traveling to and from work than in America. Take Hong Kong, which is by far the world’s most dense large first-world urban area. No other metropolitan area of its size should have such theoretically short trips, because everything is so close together. Yet, average travel time to work is almost double that of Dallas-Fort Worth, with a similar population. Indeed, even in “gridlocked” Los Angeles, so often ridiculed for its automobile-oriented “sprawl,” work trip travel times average nearly 40 minutes less per day than in that ultimate of urbanization, Hong Kong. That adds up to about a week’s worth of extra commuting time each year.

Rather than trying to constrict the dream, President Obama should work on ways to expand it. This will not be easy. Today, less than 50 percent of African-American and Latino households own their own homes. At the same time, Anglo home ownership is about 75 percent. No program to extend the American Dream can be based on policies that unnecessarily increase the price of housing.

For the new President, there is a clear choice. He can cast his lot with those whose strategies would extinguish the aspirations of millions of Americans, or he could make it easier for more households in the nation to achieve the American Dream.

Wendell Cox is a Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris. He was born in Los Angeles and was appointed to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission by Mayor Tom Bradley. He is the author of “War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life.



















Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I was reading your article

I was reading your article and wondered if you had considered creating an ebook on this subject. Your writing would sell it fast. You have a lot of writing talent.
https://rebelmouse.com/bobbyriomagneticmessaging/

The year heralds along with

The year heralds along with correct start off of your new several years for designs with hairstyles. look at here now

It was a very good post

It was a very good post indeed. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it in my lunch time. Will surely come and visit this blog more often. Thanks for sharing.
new ways to turn a girl on

He serves as an example to

He serves as an example to others to take a risk and test new technologies. If the technology works, and in this case it seems that it does, it’s a win for everyone. tooth whitening Cardiff

If you set out to make me

If you set out to make me think today; mission accomplished! I really like your writing style and how you express your ideas. Thank you.
the secret survey michael fiore pdf

Glad that i have found you

Glad that i have found you people. as we all know Card Sharks is an American television game show. Is it similar to rock,paper,scissors game? How many participants are there for the show? Expecting more such shows from your part. Regards review of dental possibilities

Hybrid and other advanced

Hybrid and other advanced car and fuel technologies can make it possible for the personal transportation sector to achieve massive long term GHG reductions. The answer is regulating emissions, rather than Trailer Storage

The Brookings Institution,

The Brookings Institution, the Progressive Policy Institute and others have published studies showing that people in low income households are far more likely to find and hold employment if they have access to cars Truck Storage

Very good post. Something

Very good post. Something which is very close to our heart. You always have a way of making it so easy to follow your thoughts and what you're sharing with us RV Storage Orange County

The problem is that the

The problem is that the theory is not and cannot be translated into reality. There is no more comfortable place to live in the world for people – particularly those past their youthful and single years – than the American suburb windows in derby

Pure Green Coffee Bean Extract

The typical formulation now is that in order to reduce GHG emissions, Americans need to be crowded into dense urban areas and give up our cars.Pure Green Coffee Bean Extract

Your blog provided us with

Your blog provided us with valuable information to work with. Each every tips of your post are awesome. Thanks dude Plantation Chiropractor

But the planning and

But the planning and urbanist lobbies may not fundamentally be driven by the perceived need to reduce GHGs. They would rather regulate people, just as was the case well before climate change was even on the political agenda. elegant nails

I like this post,And I guess

I like this post,And I guess that they having fun to read this post,they shall take a good site to make a information,thanks for sharing it to me cheap tickets

The typical formulation now

The typical formulation now is that in order to reduce GHG emissions, Americans need to be crowded into dense urban areas and give up our cars. testosterone booster

At the same time, Anglo home

At the same time, Anglo home ownership is about 75 percent. No program to extend the American Dream can be based on policies that unnecessarily increase the price of housing herb ic

Hybrid and other advanced

Hybrid and other advanced car and fuel technologies can make it possible for the personal transportation sector to achieve massive long term GHG reductions. The answer is regulating emissions, rather than people Desenvolvimento de Sistemas

Well I don`t think this will

Well I don`t think this will look nice in the eyes of the citizens. I never enjoyed Barak Obama`s figure myself and I think he`ll cause a lot of problems because of this American Dream that now, all of a sudden it`s becoming more and more expensive. They should of think about this at the beginning, cause honestly now it`s too late. I heard this topic before while I was staying in a hotel in France

Pro American Dream

The new administration and President Obama is for sure not against the American Dream. The current situation right now is not a joke that any leader would never want to happen. Life now is very hard and almost every megalith of business had its roots as a start up business at one point, and people were there at the ground floor. However, it's getting harder to do so. John Taylor, VP of research for the National Venture Capitalists Association reports that ventures are down, because people are far choosier about who'll they'll financially back with installment loans to start a company. The number of investments has dropped over 50% since last year. Venture capitalists have been hit hard by the recession, and it makes it harder for people with a start up business to get the installment loans they need to realize their dream.

No more building sprawl.

Obama was recently quoted as saying building sprawl must stop.

So, a 60 year trend of Americans decamping to the suburbs will be quashed or "nudged" into something else.

Whatever the American Dream, I don't think it ever included housing decisions being made for people by the pointy-headed in DC.

Nonsense

Please define the "American Dream". I find this article suspect when you try and impose a "vision" not only on America, but other countries in the world. That's not very Libertarian of you.

I suppose the very definition - at leas the one you're insinuating - is changing in the wake of increased energy costs and our economic downturn.

    The Brookings Institution, the Progressive Policy Institute and others have published studies showing that people in low income households are far more likely to find and hold employment if they have access to cars.

You don't need a report from a "progressive" institute to tell you that.

What about the millions of Americans who can't afford a car or are disabled?

    In reality, nothing of the kind is required. “Green” houses are being developed that can make it possible to substantially reduce GHG emissions while Americans continue their favored suburban life styles (the lifestyles, by the way, also favored by Europeans and Japanese)

"Green" sprawl type homes are an oxymoron. To live is to consume, but I and others question the amount of greenwashing it takes to deem large energy consuming lifestyles (i.e. auto-dependent suburbia) as "green" or "sustainable".

    Today, less than 50 percent of African-American and Latino households own their own homes. At the same time, Anglo home ownership is about 75 percent. No program to extend the American Dream can be based on policies that unnecessarily increase the price of housing.

The entire housing bubble was about programs and banks giving out excessive loans to people who could not afford what they were "buying". Increased price of housing is an issue, but so are transportation costs.

Last time I checked, the average cost of a new car was about 20k, plus insurance, and an elastic energy supply. It's concerning that you avoid (intentionally of course) the burdens imposed by such lifestyles that you're promoting.

    the lifestyles, by the way, also favored by Europeans and Japanese

Based off of...what? Your opinion? Misleading data/research from Bruegmann? Did you ask these people?

Sprawl is not the answer to an environmentally friendly future or one that is less expensive, as this article painfully tries to suggest.

http://htaindex.cnt.org/

Home ownership is something that many Americans want, and there's plenty of good examples of single-family homes (and neighborhoods) surrounding every American city that are affordable, offer decreased transportation costs, and are environmentally friendly decreased dependency on automobile transportation (there's nothing wrong with cars, just the amount of use they get from Americans is something to question).