Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Susan Rosalsky's avatar

for me, it's impossible to think of abundance without also thinking of costs, to the planet in particular. Haven't read the book yet, but any discussion of abundance must also include balancing human needs with that of other species and the environment. Because only that balance will ensure that the human species has a future here. No one's going to Mars anytime soon except in their fantasies. Relatedly, the idea of abundance must be separated from the idea of perpetual growth. Such a hard thing for us to separate ourselves from -- that we must continue to be bigger, better, faster, than we were last year. The corporatist fear that having exactly what we need = a loss of profit, that fear seems like the obstacle to an argument that we already have enough for everyone. (which ima guessing is what "abundance" is about)

Expand full comment
LK's avatar

As a person who has studied housing, interviewed buyers + builders + city planning folks in areas of serious wealth and racial division that is only really understood when you walk neighborhoods, this book avoids examination of the entrenched power players that refuse to build workforce affordable housing and multigenerational housing despite demand.

The free market of transit + housing + community building fails by design in American, and the constant lies about European “socialism” ignores the facts of how housing grew out of alms housing for the elderly - it was an act of faith to care about the members of your community. They then tried multiple supports and market designs and still review what needs tweaking. They did not just abandon people and access to basic standard of care.

Abundance means that people have a living wage where only 25% of their earnings goes to shelter. They can save, have a family vacation, access basic healthcare and not be afraid of old age.

Expand full comment
37 more comments...

No posts