Matthew Yglesias

@mattyglesias ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated No

Last Checked Dec. 14, 2022

Created

Sun Dec 11 16:31:45 +0000 2022

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter for iPhone

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Matthew Yglesias @mattyglesias

That’s typically American to address a concern about the market with a very opaque private sector subsidy — the Viennese solution of direct public provision is more European (see also the Miljonprogrammet in postwar Sweden). But the debate took a turn. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 11, 2022

Preceded By

Matthew Yglesias @mattyglesias

My impression from the US context is that in the old debate the right pole was “there should be as much construction as the market provides” and the Old Left pole was “no the market will generate too little construction.” Hence the US interest in Fannie/Freddie subsidy schemes. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 11, 2022

Followed By

Matthew Yglesias @mattyglesias

The New Left view was to worry that both the state and the market were inclined to overprovide construction and we had to construct an apparatus of local control to ensure that we would build *less* than the market wanted, to treat construction as a form of pollution. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 11, 2022