If you know contemporary Seattle, you probably know that we have a housing crisis. If you know me at all, you’ve probably heard about how I grew up in London and most of my school friends can’t afford to live anywhere in London, which terrifies me about Seattle’s future. So it should be no surprise that housing affordability is a huge issue in local politics, and one that I pay a lot of attention to. Equally unsurprising: even among people who agree that we have a problem and it’s important, there’s wide disagreement about what to do, and these disagreements often get very bitter.
Against that background it was a relief this evening when a panel discussion about the housing crisis managed not to bring out any of that vitriol, and stayed a respectful, interesting airing of differing views. At the risk of caricaturing the panelists’ views a little, I would summarise them as:
- Hodan Hassan of Got Green, making a strong and convincing moral case against displacement and for paying particular attention to the displacement of minorities, and opposing market solutions because capitalism and land ownership are themselves the problem.
- Zach Lubarsky of Seattle Tech 4 Housing [full disclosure: I’ve done a tiny bit of volunteer work for this org], arguing that the market has to be used in solving this problem, and the reason it hasn’t worked so far is restrictive zoning getting in the way.
- Laura Loe, who did an outstanding job of threading the needle between these two positions, which is what I really want to talk about.
Continue reading “Housing: short vs long views”
One of the pleasures of working on FINclusionLab has been getting my work translated into the languages of most of the countries we cover: French, Spanish, and Turkish. By happy coincidence these are also most of the languages that I either speak or am making a serious effort to learn. I am not fluent enough in any of them to do the translating myself, but I can at least understand the translations that I’m applying, and read domestic press coverage when it comes out. It’s not always easy to get key stakeholders to actually use the tools we’re making for them, so it was a pleasure to see Mexico’s national bank trumpeting the release of the financial inclusion dashboards we made:
La CNBV presentó los mapas interactivos para el análisis de la inclusión financiera en México
[Google’s translation is not bad, albeit even wordier than an already government-speak heavy press release]
I was recently party to a discussion about a code of conduct for an internet community, in which we found ourselves trying to delineate the difference between welcome and unwelcome forms of nationalism. The moderator found a better way to work around that, but the question got me thinking. I am generally anti-nationalist, but there are forms of nationalism that I do tend to sympathise with, and it’s worth trying to clarify why. To start making sense of implicit demarcations like this, I find it helpful to start with a list of opposites in my own feelings: Continue reading “What if the Nation State is the problem?”
9 years ago, I was part of a small team that founded what is now Happiness Alliance. Our goal was to get happiness taken seriously as the primary objective of public policy, instead of the status quo in which governments maximise economic indicators without questioning whether they are even good metrics of the economy, never mind why we prioritise the economy above everything else in life. This is not a new idea; in fact I still think Bobby Kennedy said it best in 1968:
…Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product – if we judge the United States of America by that – that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile….
And yet, four decades later we still encountered endless skepticism about the whole idea. Those who accepted the premise kept telling us that it was futile because public policy interventions never make a measurable difference to happiness anyway.
Sadly, recent work by the Happiness Alliance (I am no longer involved, but cheer them on from the sidelines) has proven the skeptics wrong in the most negative way possible. We can now clearly see that the grinding awfulness of 2017 was not just in my head or my social circle, but has added up to a measurable decrease in self-reported happiness:
There are a couple of important caveats to understand here:
- This is a “convenience sample”, meaning it has not been weighted to be fully representative of the population –but there’s no reason to expect that 2017’s sample will have new or different biases, having been recruited in the same ways as previous years’.
- We don’t know where every survey taker was, so it’s impossible to compare US-based respondents with those elsewhere –but we do know that the vast majority of respondents are in the US.
It’s not a huge effect size—only 5-6%—but it is highly statistically significant, and when I remember all the people saying we’d never see any changes at all I can’t help but be impressed. And glad that this thing I helped start has had the staying power to be able to look at trends over years.
It seems that totally unhelpful news graphics are not exactly a new problem. Here is Mark Twain’s take on them, during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870:
TO THE READER.
The accompanying map explains itself.
The idea of this map is not original with me, but is borrowed from the “Tribune” and the other great metropolitan journals.
I claim no other merit for this production (if I may so call it) than that it is accurate. The main blemish of the city-paper maps of which it is an imitation, is, that in them more attention seems paid to artistic picturesqueness than geographical reliability. …[read more]
Original image courtesy of Mapping As A Process, which published a deep dive on all the different variants which have been published, their history and reception.