Betting on housing looks risky, yes, until you compare it to the other long odds out there.
I’ve been thinking lately about impermanence. Looking around my Florida town, I see evidence of disintegration and growth happening simultaneously. Rather than the “normal” ebb and flow of decline and growth, however, this feels out of control—like a drunken binge in a Vegas casino, where you make a fortune, lose it, then start over by putting up your pickup truck and your watch.
On one block are three abandoned homes from the 1960s, blackened shingles on their roofs, and vines growing into broken windows. Not far away, eight luxury duplexes near completion, the developer dreaming of Airbnbs and quick flips. But do these paths to a quick buck still deliver?
Look at the demographics, he would say. This area is up-and-coming. He could show us the sales data, the comps, and the new small businesses opening nearby. Ultimately, however, he’s a gambler, not a prophet. And he might be in a less-risky position than the rest of us.
Why? Because, whether we like it or not, we’re ALL playing the high-risk economic game now.
As I write this, huge amounts of our private wealth are being dumped into technology we don’t fully understand to deliver things we don’t necessarily want. AI is leading this “revolution.” But don’t forget cryptocurrency, autonomous vehicles, digital banking, and other top-down “innovations.”
We’re being told by people who like to spend other people’s money that if we just play along, they will build us a better world—one with a life of leisure, untold riches and scientific wizardry.
The “just trust us” meme has worn thin, however. The latest Pew survey finds that 80 percent of us want AI regulated more aggressively. Only 17 percent think it will make their lives better. (Pushback on data centers is growing.)
One estimate suggests that without AI data centers, the nation’s total economic growth for 2025 would be just 0.1 percent. That’s a deep, deep dive into a technology that’s deeply distrusted by most citizens. Could the whole house of cards collapse?
Which brings me back to that Florida developer, who is confident that his neighborhood upgrade will sell. When you put his gamble in perspective, it seems less risky. A house is a physical asset that’s almost certain to retain a lot of value, barring a total economic collapse. Housing is about as safe a bet as you can make in these shifting times, aside from gold and silver.
But we, as an industry, have work to do to make housing more affordable. A new research paper titled “Giving Up” came out last week. It talks about how younger people who believe that they might never own a home go through a deep psychological shift:
“They consume more relative to their wealth, reduce work effort, and take on riskier investments.”
In other words, they’re perfectly primed to bet everything on untested and dubious technical promises that will change their quality of life. And they’re willing to tear everything down and start over, if that’s what it takes. That’s why we have the current government that we do. They wanted to disrupt the status quo.
I hope I’m proven wrong. I hope AI makes us all prosperous and peaceful. But if I had to put money down on something tangible, I’d bet on sticks and bricks and land.
The performance of housing keeps going up, at least among progressive builders like the ones you’ll read about in this issue. A house built with pride of workmanship can hold its value for generations. Let’s keep fighting the good fight: creating real value, for real people.
Veteran journalist Matt Power has reported on innovation and sustainability in housing for nearly three decades. An award-winning writer, editor, and filmmaker, he has a long history of asking hard questions and adding depth and context as he unfolds complex issues.
Gambling on Change
Betting on housing looks risky, yes, until you compare it to the other long odds out there.
I’ve been thinking lately about impermanence. Looking around my Florida town, I see evidence of disintegration and growth happening simultaneously. Rather than the “normal” ebb and flow of decline and growth, however, this feels out of control—like a drunken binge in a Vegas casino, where you make a fortune, lose it, then start over by putting up your pickup truck and your watch.
On one block are three abandoned homes from the 1960s, blackened shingles on their roofs, and vines growing into broken windows. Not far away, eight luxury duplexes near completion, the developer dreaming of Airbnbs and quick flips. But do these paths to a quick buck still deliver?
Look at the demographics, he would say. This area is up-and-coming. He could show us the sales data, the comps, and the new small businesses opening nearby. Ultimately, however, he’s a gambler, not a prophet. And he might be in a less-risky position than the rest of us.
Why? Because, whether we like it or not, we’re ALL playing the high-risk economic game now.
As I write this, huge amounts of our private wealth are being dumped into technology we don’t fully understand to deliver things we don’t necessarily want. AI is leading this “revolution.” But don’t forget cryptocurrency, autonomous vehicles, digital banking, and other top-down “innovations.”
We’re being told by people who like to spend other people’s money that if we just play along, they will build us a better world—one with a life of leisure, untold riches and scientific wizardry.
The “just trust us” meme has worn thin, however. The latest Pew survey finds that 80 percent of us want AI regulated more aggressively. Only 17 percent think it will make their lives better. (Pushback on data centers is growing.)
One estimate suggests that without AI data centers, the nation’s total economic growth for 2025 would be just 0.1 percent. That’s a deep, deep dive into a technology that’s deeply distrusted by most citizens. Could the whole house of cards collapse?
Which brings me back to that Florida developer, who is confident that his neighborhood upgrade will sell. When you put his gamble in perspective, it seems less risky. A house is a physical asset that’s almost certain to retain a lot of value, barring a total economic collapse. Housing is about as safe a bet as you can make in these shifting times, aside from gold and silver.
But we, as an industry, have work to do to make housing more affordable. A new research paper titled “Giving Up” came out last week. It talks about how younger people who believe that they might never own a home go through a deep psychological shift:
“They consume more relative to their wealth, reduce work effort, and take on riskier investments.”
In other words, they’re perfectly primed to bet everything on untested and dubious technical promises that will change their quality of life. And they’re willing to tear everything down and start over, if that’s what it takes. That’s why we have the current government that we do. They wanted to disrupt the status quo.
I hope I’m proven wrong. I hope AI makes us all prosperous and peaceful. But if I had to put money down on something tangible, I’d bet on sticks and bricks and land.
The performance of housing keeps going up, at least among progressive builders like the ones you’ll read about in this issue. A house built with pride of workmanship can hold its value for generations. Let’s keep fighting the good fight: creating real value, for real people.
By Matt Power, Editor-In-Chief
Veteran journalist Matt Power has reported on innovation and sustainability in housing for nearly three decades. An award-winning writer, editor, and filmmaker, he has a long history of asking hard questions and adding depth and context as he unfolds complex issues.Also Read