An abundance agenda—public policies that lead to diversity in consumer goods and financial security for families—should be an economic and moral imperative. That’s what Richard Morrison and I argue in two recent essays.
Over at the Washington Examiner, we argue that an abundance agenda can be bipartisan on crucial topics like reliable energy, affordable housing, and new job creation.
In a companion piece at Discourse, we acknowledge that concerns about abundance are partially emotional and psychological. Therefore, we have to address them at that level:
A successful abundance agenda will have to directly address the concerns critics have about the pathways to greater production and growth. We need to understand and address the worries—for example, over fairness and safety—that drove people to create the sclerotic burden of regulation we’re living with now. We have to understand the values that motivate most political (and personal) action and demonstrate to the people who want to say “not in my backyard” to everything—the NIMBYs—that they can still have a safe and fair society even without the regulations we have now.