The Socialist Mindset

Anti-development forces are always raising their head: demanding “affordable housing” before allowing a new development to go through.

Oh, you may say: “this is not socialism.” That may be true, but how would you classify this mentality? How do you describe the mindset that holds up the production of something valuable – housing – in order to make certain that “all” can afford a particular item the moment it becomes available; that something shouldn’t be created for the “rich” without also being available for the poor. That’s the socialist ideal. We hear it in housing, we hear it in the healthcare debate, we hear it everywhere.

Is this mindset “socialism?” No, it can’t properly be classified as such, it is something different. It is one of those states of mind that both results from a philosophical position and creates it: there is a chicken and egg aspect to it.

By not defeating this state of mind we are allowing the revival of socialism under another name. The results, of course, would be the same regardless of the name.

It is this state of mind that hinders and hurts our economy, our schools, our society. I know that many are “trying to do the right thing,” but in trying to do good less units are built; more time is spent in bringing them to market; and in that individuals and “society” is being hurt. As the saying goes: “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Society – for those who think in such a manner -- is hurt because we need more housing, not less; we need more housing by transit hubs, not less; we need more construction jobs, more tax revenue (from the sale of the apartments and profit from renting) not less. In the name of giving low income people homes we’ve hurt everyone and disproportionately affected the low and working class.

The Malthusian Paradox

We’ll never pay for all the desired social programs. Think of this as the Malthusian Paradox. As social programs are created they take money from the money-generating sector. Money creation slows and social programs have to be halted, cut-back or eliminated. Conversely as wealth is being created there is less need for social programs. There is a point on the scale, analogus to the sweet-spot on the Laffer Curve, where the social good of government programs and the economic detriment balance out. Unfortunately that is an unknowable, unproveable point.

Furthermore, as with the Laffer Curve, it doesn't address the philosophical and constitutional problems inherent in social programs.