A serious approach to the affordability crisis requires a multi-year strategy targeting the biggest cost drivers: housing (massive supply increase), healthcare (nationalization), and education (income-based tuition), combined with aggressive antitrust enforcement. Piecemeal solutions from either party fail to address the systemic nature of the problem.
Related Insights
Instead of a radical healthcare overhaul, a pragmatic solution is to lower Medicare eligibility by two years, every year. This phased approach would gradually move the US toward nationalized coverage, address the highest-cost demographic first, and allow the private sector time to adapt. This single policy change could potentially eliminate the entire annual federal deficit.
Meaningful affordability cannot be achieved with superficial fixes. It requires long-term, structural solutions: building 5-10 million more homes to address housing costs (40% of CPI), implementing universal healthcare to lower medical expenses, expanding public higher education, and aggressive antitrust enforcement to foster competition.
Recent elections show a clear pattern: politicians win by focusing on groceries, rent, and healthcare. These three categories, dubbed the "unholy trinity," represent the biggest inflation pain points and make up 55% of the average American's cost of living, making them the decisive political issue.
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.
Rising calls for socialist policies are not just about wealth disparity, but symptoms of three core failures: unaffordable housing, fear of healthcare-driven bankruptcy, and an education system misaligned with job outcomes. Solving these fundamental problems would alleviate the pressure for radical wealth redistribution far more effectively.
The narrative that personal problems require therapy pathologizes what are often systemic economic issues. You cannot "therapy your way out of material precarity." Structural solutions like higher wages, affordable housing, and a stronger social safety net are often more effective mental health policies than individual introspection.
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.
To fix the student debt crisis, universities should be financially on the hook for the first portion of any loan default (e.g., $20,000). This "first loss" position would compel them to underwrite the economic viability of their own degrees, creating a powerful market check against pushing students into overpriced and low-value programs.
A centrist solution to high drug prices involves combining ideas from both political aisles. Oliver Libby suggests allowing Medicare to negotiate prices (a left-leaning idea) while also extending patent life for drug companies (a right-leaning idea), thus lowering costs without killing the incentive for innovation.
America's mental health crisis is largely driven by economic precarity. Systemic solutions like a higher minimum wage, affordable housing, and universal healthcare would be more effective at improving population well-being than an individualistic focus on therapy, which often treats symptoms rather than the root cause of financial stress.
