Enormous government injections of money into the economy have the effect of distorting market forces and shifting the foundations of the economy for a long time. The best historical example: the federal government's huge investment in the interstate system in the 50s made suburban development relatively cheap because transportation infrastructure costs were borne by the government.
In different ways, the authors below are all making the point that we should be deliberate about how this stimulus happens, because it will inevitably affect the economy's ground rules for years to come.
The first article (Link) argues that if we really want to use less energy, we'll never get there by designing more efficient cars.
In 1865, English economist William Stanley Jevons discovered an efficiency paradox: the more efficient you make machines, the more energy they use. Why? Because the more efficient they are, the better they are, the cheaper they are and more people buy them, and the more they’ll use them.
The next editorial (Link), written by Peter Calthorpe, takes the same sentiment to the next level and argues that the stimulus package should be focused on three areas:
• Transportation funding that moves away from a bias for highway projects and toward transit investment.
• Environmental policy that protects air quality and opens space.
• Federal housing assistance that moves beyond its historic orientations toward single-family hosing to encourage urban redevelopment.
The final article (Link) makes the point that we shouldn't neglect design in our haste to jump into the massive backlog of "shovel-ready" projects:
We need to ensure that the money spent goes to creative, sustainable buildings that will stand the test of time and will still be used by our children and our grandchildren. After all, they are the ones who are going to be paying for these debt-financed projects.
Via Planetizen
No comments:
Post a Comment