The environment for building new infrastructure has worsened significantly. Opposition has moved beyond localized "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) sentiment to a more generalized, intractable stance of "Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything" (BANANAS), paralyzing development.
Related Insights
Reacting to the developmental excesses of figures like Robert Moses, the American legal profession, led by thinkers like Ralph Nader, transformed from enablers of large projects into regulators and litigators. This 1960s shift created the anti-development legal culture that paralyzes the U.S. today.
Adam Carolla argues that the time and expense of navigating regulations, like those from California's Coastal Commission, are so prohibitive that many people simply give up on building projects altogether, even on their own property. The bureaucratic friction outweighs the desire to build.
Unlike a new stadium or factory, AI data centers don't offer a tangible local service. Residents experience negative externalities like higher electricity prices and construction disruption without any unique access to AI products, making the "Not In My Backyard" argument particularly compelling and bipartisan.
Local communities increasingly oppose AI data centers because they bear the costs (higher power bills, construction noise) without receiving unique benefits. Unlike a local stadium, the AI services are globally available, giving residents no tangible return for the disruption. This makes it a uniquely difficult "NIMBY" argument to overcome.
The difference in home price trends between US regions is not about weather or jobs, but housing supply. States in the South and West that permit widespread new construction are seeing prices fall, while "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) states in the Northeast and Midwest face shortages and rising prices.
Previously ignored, the unprecedented scale of new AI data centers is now sparking significant grassroots opposition. NIMBY movements in key hubs like Virginia are beginning to oppose these projects, creating a potential bottleneck for the physical infrastructure required to power the AI revolution.
Local city governments are often captured by "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) homeowners who block essential development. A practical solution is to elevate planning and zoning authority to the state level. States, motivated by tax revenues and broader growth, are inherently more development-friendly.
Housing scarcity is a bottom-up cycle where homeowners' financial incentive is to protect their property value (NIMBYism). They then vote for politicians who enact restrictive building policies, turning personal financial interests into systemic regulatory bottlenecks.
Google, Microsoft, and Amazon have all recently canceled data center projects due to local resistance over rising electricity prices, water usage, and noise. This grassroots NIMBYism is an emerging, significant, and unforeseen obstacle to building the critical infrastructure required for AI's advancement.
The state's most visible problems—homelessness, high costs, and corporate exodus—are framed not as complex policy failures but as the direct result of a singular, decades-long failure to build enough housing, office space, factories, energy, and transportation infrastructure.
