4/Much of the review is a personal criticism of Yglesias. But when Bacharach does level a specific criticism of Yglesias' acumen, it turns out to be something that EZRA KLEIN, not Yglesias, got wrong!
How does that make sense? Ezra Klein is not Matt Yglesias!
Conversation
5/When addressing the substance of the book, Bacharach asserts that Yglesias' idea to upgrade 2nd-tier research universities with federal funding (something I've long argued for) won't help the surrounding regions. But no actual evidence is presented!
3
2
70
6/Bacharach has anecdotes for regions that (supposedly) have not been revitalized by the nearby presence of universities.
And yet it's easy to find examples of regions that *have* been revitalized, even by small low-ranked universities.
medium.com/migration-issu.
4
3
80
7/There's plenty of research about the beneficial effect that universities have on the economies of the surrounding regions.
For example, this paper:
sciencedirect.com/science/articl
But Bacharach does not engage with this evidence at all.
3
4
62
8/Bacharach's dismissal of YIMBYism is similarly vague and reliant on anecdotes.
Pittsburgh has built some housing and yet rents have gone up there. So? How much would rents have gone up if the housing hadn't been built?
Bacharach doesn't even ask this question.
7
5
117
9/Bacharach claims that there's no political way to end single-family zoning, because zoning is done locally.
But he's wrong! Oregon just banned single-family zoning statewide!
4
9
153
10/In other words, something that Bacharach assumes is politically impossible is not only possible, but JUST HAPPENED. (It also came close to happening in California but failed.)
3
1
83
11/Finally, I would like to note that when writing a book review, before I assert that a phrase does not appear in the book, I make sure to do a word search.
If I have a physical copy, I avoid making strong claims about what does not appear. ;-)
2
1
67
12/To sum up, this review:
1. is an impressionistic personal broadside against Yglesias,
2. stumbles badly when discussing specific policy issues, and
3. demands a "theory of change" yet ignores the reality of actual change now taking place.
3
5
124
13/I am looking forward to reading ' book, and I hope to write a review that avoids these pitfalls.
(end)
4
114
