General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEzra Klein Meets Zohran Mamdani: Abundance for working people blows away YIMBY.

https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/2025-07-03-ezra-klein-meets-zohran-mamdani/

Ezra Klein, in his book with Derek Thompson, has made the case for an economy of abundance. He aptly points to several areas where government is badly gummed up. According to Klein and Thompson, ordinary Americans are denied the fruits of a potentially abundant economy because for half a century public policy has created too many opportunities to block. California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently took Kleins point, by pushing through bipartisan legislation to reform the California Environmental Quality Act to make it easier to win approval for new housing. Klein has the germ of a valid argument, but he has been widely criticized, including in these pages, for ignoring the broader issue of corporate power in determining what government actually does. For example, the collapse of housing construction after 2008 was not the result of a sudden increase in zoning obstacles. It was the result of Wall Streets subprime scam.
U.S. GDP per capita is a robust $89,000. Thats almost $360,000 for a family of fourif it were distributed equally. But of course, the economy becomes more unequal every year. On average, there is plenty of abundance. The problem is maldistribution, financialization, and oligarchy. Klein has fervently embraced YIMBYYes In My Backyardand the movement for zoning reform as something close to a panacea for the housing shortage. But the far bigger problem is the national failure to invest in social housing. As this comprehensive and deeply reported article in Shelterforce makes clear, a great deal of the YIMBY movement is friends of more housing but not more affordable housing. You might think that local advocates of more social housing and YIMBYs would be political allies. But in practice, a lot of YIMBYs tend to be affluent professionals and developers who resist demands for affordable housing, or want to build cheaper housing by avoiding unions.
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, in contrast, has defined a version of abundance that serves working-class Americans. He has found a framing that has resonance far beyond New York City: The cost of living is killing ordinary people. What goes into the cost of living? Housing costs, child care, food, higher education, transportation. Mamdanis program addresses these directly. Addressing the scarcity of affordable housing will require everything from new construction to rent control and other forms of regulation, of which zoning reform can be part, but only a part. Klein has scoffed at Mamdanis idea of publicly owned supermarkets in food deserts, pointing out that supermarket chains operate on very low margins. But Klein misses the fact that Mamdani is proposing grocery pilots in places where the chains dont find it profitable to operate at all. Several small towns in red-state America that have lost chain stores already have municipally owned food markets.
Klein also misses the fact that high retail food prices are substantially the result not of excessive markups by chains, but extreme consolidation and price-gouging by producers, for which the remedy is antitrust. In addition, if smaller stores could get the same pricing from food wholesalers as the big-box chainssomething that is required by law under the Robinson-Patman Actthey could compete in these food deserts. A city-owned grocery in New York would have the resources to bring Robinson-Patman cases and create a level playing field. Mamdani also demonstrates the power of narrative. To change policy, you have to get elected. To get elected, you need to be persuasive to an electoral majority. Mamdani has figured out how to do that, even by adapting a message of creating more efficient government to make it more resonant.
snip
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/ezra-klein-on-why-the-democratic-party-is-too-afraid-of-replacing-biden
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/21/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jake-tapper.html
https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/how-ezra-klein-helped-set-the-stage-for-kamala-harriss-nomination
In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)He should have chosen to open the field to have a proper primary.
To me, Joe Biden was always meant to be a one-term president when I cast my vote for him in 2020. I think he was a great president, but a great one-term president.
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)He wasnt that in 2024. The political environment was not in his favor, and was shifting away from him even as he was elected. Thats separate from being unfit.
There was already a general vibe of people wanting newer and fresher faces in 2020. When Joe Biden he was the bridge to the next generation, many of us believed that to mean one term and pass the torch.
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)Was Biden unfit to be president?
In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)I said in the previous comment that he was a great president, so clearly he was not unfit. You're implying that because I thought he shouldn't have ran that also means I thought he was unfit.
His fitness is separate from his ability to win. I think he was fit, but I didn't think he was going to win. This political usefulness had worn out, as unfair as that is to him.
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)I think he was totally fit to be president and still is.
Do you think he is or not?
In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)Sorry but you can't have it ways
In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)Joe Biden can be fit for the job and lose. You're acting like politics and the way people vote is rational.
I can think Joe Biden is fit for the job, and still think he would lose the election. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)I don't believe Joe Biden would have won. I think he was right about that.
If I don't believe Joe Biden could win, his fitness to do the job becomes irrelevant.
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)about Biden needing to be replaced? Biden might have won. Since that campaign was never run no one knows how it would have turned out.
In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)I think Joe Biden would have lost, and feel confident about that.
People blamed him for inflation, and I thought he wasn't going to escape that, and that's on top of people being concerned about his age. They successfully made his age an election issue.
Unfortunately for Joe Biden, he couldn't effectively use the bully pulpit he had as President to combat the things that were weighing him down. People think Presidents are magic and could stop wars with the snap of a finger, and that counted against Biden.
Inflation alone was enough for really believe we need a new candidate, but once Biden made his choice that he was going to run for re-election, I was willing to do whatever it took to get him re-elected, donating money and time... but I was terrified the whole time because I wasn't confident like I was in 2020.
SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)how a Biden vs Trump race would have turned out, so there is no way to know that Klein was "right" to attack Biden the way he did.
In It to Win It
(12,678 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(7,810 posts)Just a simple statement of fact. No one knows the outcome of an event that never happened. So it's impossible to claim that Klein was "right" to attack Biden.
KPN
(17,461 posts)choie
(6,964 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(23,660 posts)-snip-
I find this quote chilling. Heres one of the leading advocates of abundance saying in plain English that he (1) self-consciously sees their project as battling with the left for the future of the Democratic Party, (2) understands that were in a moment of intense anger at the establishment status quo, and (3) believes that the abundance agenda can channel the anger that people have at the establishment, but toward our own ends, i.e., redirect the publics rage away from the parasitism of economic elites and toward the regulatory regimes of state and local Democrats.
This is what anyone whos been confused by the strength of the abundance backlash needs to understand. Our concern is not that the framework is a dry, technocratic exercise with no political core, as Resnikoff put it. Our fear is that this billionaire-backed project is being explicitly used to undermine the kind of populist rebrand necessary to shed Democrats reputation as feckless cowards who cant be trusted to fight for working peopleto swap out a villainization of corporate elites that evokes FDR with a demonization of bureaucracy, regulation, and red tape that lends credibility to Elon Musk, who, its worth noting, reposted a clip of Klein pitching abundance with the message, This shows why regulatory overhaul is necessary.
This isnt an idle fear. Abundance proponents are extremely influential within the Democratic Party; just this week a group of centrist Democrats launched an Abundance Caucus and Klein briefed Senate Democrats at their annual retreat. Thats particularly concerning given that taking on oligarchy-aligned Democratic elites was already a herculean task. Abundance, and the permission structure it offers Democrats whod rather not alienate their Big Tech/Big Oil/Big Money donors, could be the margin that pushes a populist renaissance for our party out of reach.
Get informed before you get brainwashed by a flood of clickbait misinformation that insists the Abundance Agenda is the only way Dems can win elections - Mamdani has thoroughly refuted that nonsense.
Celerity
(54,761 posts)IF so, then I strenuously disagree.
If not, then I misunderstood your reply.
You said:
This OP article is ANTI the corporatist/centrist/neoliberal 'abundance agenda', as have been many of the posts of mine.
For instance, this OP of mine from late 2024, also from TAP:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219780977

Fiendish Thingy
(23,660 posts)My reply was directed at the general reader who may have heard a little about the AA and thought it sounded reasonable.
Our posts seem in sync- apologies for any confusion
Celerity
(54,761 posts)malaise
(297,263 posts)For visibility