49 Comments
User's avatar
Larry Schweikart's avatar

John, while you speak in terms of general theories about how to create abundance, President Trump marches ahead creating it. Today, it was announced that Pittsburgh, PA is moving to use gas and nukes to become the AI center of the country. https://blackmon.substack.com/p/pittsburgh-plans-to-become-a-major?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=712558&post_id=168470364&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=dx45b&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Now, even if they don't, it will be an economic explosion in that section of PA and, with the voter reg already at a bare 73,000 D lead, that would vanish. PA would be red for 20 years. But AI and gas/nukes are the antithesis of what the (apparent) rank-and-file want, given the Axios story about them wanting their own reps to get thrown in jail and even (quote) "shot" while getting more radical. Hard to pursue such vastly divergent agendas.

Expand full comment
dan brandt's avatar

Good article. And not to be nit picky but "live the best lives they possibly can", would be an unattainable standard. I ;live a very good life. However, to live my best life possible would mean play really good golf but for that I need new irons and that is not going to happen. Unrealistic expectations don't help. Like anyone can become president. High but realistic expectations of what your life can be is what is needed. Life gets much better when you learn to accept you have to live within your means.

Expand full comment
kellyjohnston's avatar

The key to the "abundance" agenda, which should be bipartisan, is something former Campbell Soup CEO Doug Conant still teaches: Embracing the genius of the "and" and rejecting the tyranny of the "or." Until Democrats embrace a "both ways" or all-of-the-above approach to climate and environmental responsibility with an "all the above" energy strategy, and much more, they will be stuck in their "Small is Beautiful" mindset. A key is also getting the government out of the way of technological and related developments that will unleash an abundance agenda. It may be a leap too far, at least for the foreseeable future.

Expand full comment
George Santangelo's avatar

Cities produce innovation. Red states use the technology produced by the cities in blue states to make life better for “regular” people. There’s space and jobs in the “heartland”. But there wouldn’t be any of that if the cities didn’t provide the crowded places where innovators could interact. Government needs to recognize this. Jealousy and resentment from red states and condescension from blue states makes for a very unhealthy nation. Smoothing out the inequality that innovation produces is the job of government. Experimenting with government not destroying it is the answer. DOGE is exactly wrong.

Expand full comment
Ronda Ross's avatar

The arrogance is so breathtaking, it is nearly comical. Are we to believe food and oil, overwhelmingly produced in rural areas, exist only due to city innovations? From where, pray tell, were they derived, prior to the establishment of US cities?

The jealousy and resentment of Red States? 20 years ago demographers assumed Texas would overtake CA in population in 2100. Today, 2 decades later, they assume Texas will be the most populace state sometime between 2045-2055.

Americans are on the move at a level rarely found in US history. They are quite literally, fleeing Blue States, over quality of life issues. Most growth is suburban, not urban.

It is a large country, that requires a multitude of skills, to perpetuate its' existence. Some are urban, some rural. Perhaps the issue is, most rural residents regularly visit cities, while clearly many city residents, have little experience or appreciation of rural America. Take a road trip and broaden your horizons, or perhaps refrain from insulting every non urban area of the US.

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

Urban areas produce law, finance, entertainment, and sexual theme parks for young adults. Lots of GDP but noting real.

Expand full comment
KDBD's avatar

Innovation as measured by patents is more centered around universities then cities Yes if the surrounding area encourages cross pollination of ideas and opportunities for individuals to hop from place to place that supercharges innovation But after you get past California and Massachusetts for patent development per population the patent generation is equally distributed among red and blue states and usually centered around a key university there. California and Massachusetts are special cases. California really benefited from federal money coming from the defense department and Stanford university which happened during WW II and later. Massachusetts has three top universities near Boston which drive research money. Having really healthy universities seems to me more of a center for innovation however it is also true that the surrounding culture and infrastructure can have a significant impact on it which comes back to your point.

Expand full comment
dan brandt's avatar

The goal of DOGE is to root out spending money on projects that are a waste/fraud/abuse instead of funding things that will improve our lives. All other measured approaches have failed. Note the issue with trying to pass a bill for a $9 billion claw back of federal funds. A few senators had to be bought off with their childish demands before it could pass. Reminds me of when there was Nebraska, my state, kickback to start the ACA. True or not, it is still believed to this day it happened.

Expand full comment
Ed Smeloff's avatar

A recently release Virginia poll found that the cost of living continues to be voters’ top concern, with reproductive rights and immigration also ranking high. Democratic candidate Spanberger, is touting an “Affordable Virginia Plan” that lays out her vision for lowering housing, energy and health care costs. She enjoys a 31 percentage point lead among voters aged 18-24 years old.

Expand full comment
Jim James's avatar

To me, "abundance" is just one more empty liberal slogan. Here in WA State, the Democrats are actively reducing the standard of living here with high taxes on fuel.

Expand full comment
ConsDemo's avatar

It's true that there are some obvious opponents of abundance on the left, the folks that either oppose development outright or just try to saddle it with so many requirements that it is almost impossible to build. However, one less noticed item in the debate is how much NIMBYism there is on the right. It is true that the pre-Trump right's laissez-faire attitude on development did lead to a lot of building. However, some segments of the Trumpian right really hate higher density development. Even the Supreme Leader himself made somme comment about "protecting the suburbs" which was seen as a slam on plans to develop multi-family housing.

Expand full comment
Robert Shannon's avatar

Too simple a solution for the elite college educated elites that run the education system and social welfare to grasp. With a college degree, I preferred the hammer and nails of hands on construction and always did well and was able to put some money away. Too many 'menial' labor jobs that pay extremely well go unfilled because of the elitist thinking. They need to get down in the dirt with mainstream.

Expand full comment
Mark Kuvalanka's avatar

Great piece!!! The perfect example of NIMBY is on Martha's Vineyard when the illegal migrants arrived. Hilarious. Go Dems!!!

Expand full comment
MG's avatar

Go immigrants! No, really go...

Expand full comment
Dale McConnaughay's avatar

Yes, competition between the political parties to achieve abundance, like competition in all things, typically produces better results. We don't need to reach as far back as FDR for solid bipartisan evidence of that.

President Reagan's much undeservedly maligned supply-side economics produced prosperity of such magnitude that per capita charitable giving's rise to then record highs proved that when you permit Americans to keep more of their hard-earned money, they are generous about sharing it with others without being compelled by government redistributive edict to do so.

Fast forward 10 years and President Clinton, hand-in-hand with a GOP Congress, facilitated by way of regulation repeal and tax incentives a dot.com boom that brought us the first and last balanced budget even as spending grew every year of his presidency; the consequence of revenue abundancy.

President Trump's reciprocal tarriffs saw the U.S. come out some $26 trillion in the black on trade last month, another milestone.

In their competition for abundance, Democrats and Republicans should be able to see and agree that the biggest hurdle to achieving it is the radtical politics of the far Left and Right.

Expand full comment
ban nock's avatar

A very tenuous connection at best.

Abundant energy and jobs doesn't necessarily lead to financial security for the working class, especially if we continue to import millions of low wage workers. Ezra's abundance is driven by grads not being able to afford a condo in Manhattan of a house in Malibu. I like the kind of abundance sold by that Mamdani commie running for mayor of NY. A $30 min would do a lot more for the working class than exhortations to "learn to code" which we've all heard before.

Expand full comment
tobe berkovitz's avatar

“Learn to code” has gone down the drain with the rise of AI.

Expand full comment
Jim James's avatar

In WA State, diesel costs $5/gallon and there's a 20% tax on the propane that heats my house when it gets cold. In Idaho, diesel goes for $3.75, and in South Dakota $3. The Democratic Party hates the standard of living.

Expand full comment
dan brandt's avatar

The reason it is so expensive to live in DC is every time congress gives themselves or government employees a raise, the cost of living in DC is goes up to match the raise. When in the military, one extra pay was separate rats. That included how much each rank could spend on housing. Ever time separate rats went up, rent went up to match it. A $30 per hour minimum would just produce a $30 per hour life style. Nothing changes just costs more.

Expand full comment
Ed Smeloff's avatar

Here are some policies that will help create the foundations for stable and secure families in the U.S. Make it easier to build things by modernizing environmental laws written for the 1970s. Expand Medicaid to assure affordable health care is widely available. Don't protect wasteful large agricultural operations through tariffs. Don't militarize politicized deportation activities and create labor shortages in needed areas like construction, agriculture and health.

Expand full comment
Cindy's avatar

I live in a red gulf coast southern state … where I live there is constant construction. Both housing and businesses … mostly retail, restaurants etc. Starting to see trickles of other kinds of businesses as well which is needed

Son lives in Oregon … there was little to no new construction that we saw … as the article says, the regulatory environment plus NIMBY coalition makes it too costly to build new housing … housing is in short supply and therefore expensive. They would like to stay in Oregon, it is beautiful, but they worry about housing costs

Expand full comment
Jim James's avatar

My spouse owns a condo in Beaverton. He keeps it vacant because Oregon instituted laws that, in essence, told small-time landlords that they were targeted for harassment and worse. Given that at least half of the state's rental units are owned by mom & pops, and new construction is often in the form of additions or so-called "accessory dwelling units," the result has been a screeching halt to new housing construction other than ultra-luxury buildings.

Oregon's "progressive" Democrats truly hate the little people at every level. They are just as bad as the Democrats in California. And now they hate business. Plus they are so incompetent in K-12 education that public school enrollment is declining fast while home schooling is booming. Will they learn anything? Hell no. "Progressives" never, ever question themselves at any level.

Expand full comment
Cindy's avatar

Thanks for the information … that is indeed sad. I cannot understand why they cannot see this? I can see my son trying to figure it out… he is in AI and works from home so he could live anywhere

Also I prepared his taxes … apparently Oregon seeks to have a more ‘equitable tax code’ and would like to know your ethnicity?? So what exactly does this mean … if you are white they want to tax you more?

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

The bottleneck for abundance is electricity. Trying to electrify everything while stifling generation and transmission is never going to work. Add in the NIMBYs of Right and Left plus the preservation people and you have stalemate.

Expand full comment
Jim James's avatar

Oregon forced renewables at the expense of converting a big coal plant to gas. Electricity rates have risen by 50% in five years, and disconnections are up 20-fold. But the rich "progressives" of Portland and Salem are happy. Oh yeah, some "abundance." What a fraud.

Expand full comment
Ed Smeloff's avatar

More supply can improve affordability. But also assuring there is not monopoly manipulation of market prices regardless of supply.

Expand full comment
Betsy Chapman's avatar

Which blue state governor has started down the abundance path already? Who should we be watching and applauding?

Expand full comment
Michael Baharaeen's avatar

Colorado's Jared Polis has been talking about it for a while. https://coloradonewsline.com/2025/05/09/how-colorados-housing-supply-politics-contradict-the-abundance-narrative/

Even Gavin Newsom has gotten in on the action. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/26/abundance-movement-hits-a-labor-wall-in-california-00428602

Of course, both have experienced resistance, which isn't that surprising.

Expand full comment
Betsy Chapman's avatar

Thanks. Haven’t followed Polis, but I don’t see that labor is opposing Governor Newson in California enforcing current: wage, OSHA, environmental and child labor laws. No point in thinking up new programs, when you are not enforcing current laws. Maybe the governor could pick one, ending child labor in California marijuana farms and piggyback on ICE efforts to remove criminals. For child labor to be ignored in California is an epic scandal.

Expand full comment
Jim James's avatar

The "abundance" talk bears all the hallmarks of bullshit slogans dreamed up by Democratic Party consultants in Washington, D.C.

Expand full comment
ban nock's avatar

Pollis has done some good things with ADUs and no max per house, despite having unlimited space to grow housing prices are 20% higher than the country as a whole and there are many on the street who are not crazy nor drunks nor addicts but people living and working out of their cars.

Expand full comment
Ed Smeloff's avatar

What about Andy Bashear?

Expand full comment
MG's avatar

He vetoed a bill that sought to prohibit Medicaid from covering gender-affirming care. He's on X constantly urging people to get out and protest. Another looney.

Expand full comment
Ed Smeloff's avatar

The voters of Kentucky like him by a large margin. He would do well in Ohio, Pennsylvania and North Carolina.

Expand full comment
MG's avatar

He is very popular in KY. Right now the only thing he posts on X is progressive crap - what are his positions on immigration, men in women sports, raising taxes, cutting fraud? He will be going up against a slew of Dems in the primary who all hate Trump - what differentiates him?

Expand full comment
Ed Smeloff's avatar

MAGAheads are obsessively focused on transgender women playing sports. While it gets the base riled up it has a very marginal impact on competitive races in general elections. Look at recent polling in VA to verify that the issues are cost of living, reproductive rights and immigrant deportation.

Expand full comment
MG's avatar

I agree trans is a marginal issue, but it predicts how he's going to vote on a whole host of other issues. And I think abortion is a dead horse, you've gotten just about all the mileage you're going to get out of it. Planned Parenthood is on the chopping block.

Dems vote as a bloc on every single issue, there is not a dissenting voice in the entire party. Swing to left, continue to lose.

Expand full comment