Loading summary
Transcript35 lines
- [00:08]
A
Got my bus pass been a ride first class streetcar downtown with a fine ladies in the peeps are OG say don't hurt nobody looking this damn thing
- [00:17]
B
I'm a bit Home for many Americans, a home isn't just a place to live anymore. It's the savings account, the family inheritance, and in many cases, the retirement plan that creates a tension at the center of the housing debate. The higher prices that help a household feel secure can also make it harder for another one to get in. In a July 14 New York Times opinion piece by Kyla Scanlon called the Housing Crisis is also a retirement Crisis, she looks at how home ownership became one of the main ways Americans try to build a stable future. Part of the story is that the retirement floor has gotten weaker as more risk has shifted onto individual workers. The house became one of the few major assets many households believed they could count on, scanlon writes. The house can't do two contradictory jobs at once. It can't keep getting more expensive for the owner's retirement while also becoming easier for the next buyer to afford. Sound familiar? Building more homes can help with shelter, but it doesn't automatically address the role housing plays as a financial asset. If homeowners still need prices to rise so they can retire, then every conversation about affordability is also a conversation about whose security is being protected and whose is being delayed. So the question for today is how can we make housing affordable when we've also made home ownership one of the main ways people are supposed to feel secure? With that welcome to Upzone, where we take one big story Making the News and explore what it can teach us about building stronger towns. My name is Carly Almabar, Chief of Staff here at Strong Towns and with me today are Ali Thurman Quindlen and Daniel Herridges. Welcome guys.
- [02:04]
C
Hi Carly, Good to be here.
- [02:06]
B
I'd like to do a quick bio so our listeners know many of them know you guys. But for those that don't, Allie is an architect, landscape architect, and a small scale infill developer. She's Executive director, Director of the Incremental Development alliance and the founder and principal of range, a multidisciplinary design practice based in Fayetteville, Arkansas, where we just all spent some time. Welcome Ally.
- [02:29]
C
Thanks. So excited to be here.
- [02:32]
B
And Daniel, Many of us know Daniel is a longtime Strong Towns contributor and founding member of the Strong Towns Movement. He's the co author with Chuck Marone of Escaping the Housing the Strong Town's Response to the Housing Crisis and he now works as Policy Director at the Parking Reform Network. Welcome. Daniel. Thanks for joining us.
- [02:50]
A
Thanks, Carly.
- [02:51]
B
And, of course, Daniel, I wanted to start with you because when I read this article, it kind of felt like the core framing very much echoed the housing trap. So can you tell me what you thought when. Tell us what you thought when you read the article.
- [03:06]
A
I might actually be a little bit contrarian here, because the first thing I thought was, oh, this sounds like escaping the housing trap.
- [03:11]
C
Yeah.
- [03:12]
A
Like I was nodding along with, we're asking a house to do two fundamentally incompatible things, which is perpetually rise in value and remain affordable for new buyers. I think what would be interesting, though, is to pull apart some of the. The threads of the article, which kind of are or aren't separable from each other or figure out how separable they really are. Because I think that gets at the question of, well, what can we do about this? Because, you know, the author's thesis is this the housing crisis and, you know, the ability of people to feel secure in their retirement, that these are inextricable. I think that there, there's some truth to that. But so when we say that a house is people's nest egg, though, I think there's a sense in which that's not strictly as a financial asset. One of the things, one of the biggest expenses for seniors in retirement is housing. And actually, when I think of the people I know who own houses, I think overwhelmingly the idea is that the house I live in is an investment product in the sense that, like, I'm going to buy a bunch of stock. It's not necessarily a financial asset, like, I'm going to cash it out and, and be rich. I mean, if you're in, if you bought in California in the right time, there are places where housing has gone, you know, way, way beyond expectations. But I don't actually think that the majority of homeowners think about it that way. I think they think I am buying stability and security, including security and housing. And I think that the way in which housing is a retirement nest egg for people is that typically, once you own a home and you've paid off that home, then the way you're going to afford your next home is with the equity in the home you already have. And in some cases, you know, seniors might downsize, get some of that back in cash, or they might, you know, eventually, you know, the proceeds from a home sale might support an assisted living situation or something like that. But very often you see a lot of people who age in place, a lot of people who don't really Meaningfully downsize until very late in life. The equity they have in their home is supporting housing, which is maybe their biggest expense. And part of the reason that people have insecurity about that is because housing is so expensive, including anywhere that an older person might go and rent if they sold their home. So I think if we can kind of unpack that. I did, I ran some numbers and I won't try to talk forever, but you know, I, I have a close relative who I was curious because I knew the numbers. So I ran the numbers because they bought a home in 1990 for $110,000 and they sold that home in 2023. So just barely beyond the 30 year term of the mortgage, they sold it for $370,000, assuming a 20% down payment. So they would have made a 22,000 down payment on that home in 1990. If they had taken that down payment and put it in index funds and then paid rent roughly equivalent to, you know, the monthly payments they were making on that mortgage for 30 years, that same 22,000, that down payment would have been worth 420,000 or slightly more than what they sold the house for. So it's not. Housing is uniquely some sort of massively lucrative financial instrument versus investing money in other means is that it buys you security because one way or another you have to pay for somewhere to live. You might as well pay a mortgage if you can and build equity rather than pay rent to someone. But I think that that's the sense in which people are thinking about it as a nest egg is I need to live somewhere. I want the security of knowing that I will always have somewhere to live and that can't be ripped from me even when I am older and I'm not working for an income anymore. So I just wanted to throw that out there as kind of. Because there are some differences when you get into talking about 401ks and pensions or the authors, you know, this idea of almost like a, a wealth fund based on AI wealth, you know, what can we do to replace this sort of retirement savings? Where like, yeah, those are all interesting ideas, but I didn't find that the article cohered really tightly because I think we can actually separate what is the investment value of the house from what is the housing security value.
- [07:28]
B
Right? Yes, that's really interesting. And we're going to come back to a couple of those concepts because I thought that the. I was a bit with you that I thought the underlying principles of the article kind of spoke to something just bigger than what housing has created. But, you know, maybe housing was the entry point for the conversation. Right. Allie, what were your first reactions when you read it?
- [07:56]
C
You know, I had a lot of the same kind of the first math that I did was similar to Daniel's, although I think I came to a little bit different conclusion. I think there's a big chunk of this house house as a nest egg that is a symptom to me of our housing market. It's not the starting condition. I don't actually think we started out trying to intentionally build a housing system where your house was your ne egg. I think it's actually that that condition is downstream of housing scarcity itself, that if your mortgage is eating up 30% of your income during your peak earning years, you don't have any money left over to invest in a real retirement portfolio elsewhere. Right. In lots of other places in the world, your housing is a much smaller overall percentage of your income during peak earning years. And so you are not only investing that down payment and then all of your mortgage payments through the years. You might be renting, right? You might be owning. But if you have a housing market that is less expensive because you're able to build enough housing, and so we are all bidding ourselves up against each other and you've got a country that has better security for old age, then you don't end up in this really specific. All of your money is going to your house because that's your largest expense every month and then you can't afford anything later. You've got to fix that scheme scarcity and which starts to then correct prices pretty quickly. And then you don't need your house to double as a pension. Right? You can just save, save the difference. And, and I do think we, we're seeing downsizing significantly less in this generation than we would have 40 years ago, for instance, you know, we hear and, and that I think is again a scarcity problem. Downsizing has to be a lifestyle upgrade. In, in my opinion, you typically want to be able to be convinced to leave a house that you like, a neighborhood that you like, either be able to buy something else, rent something else that is in your same neighborhood, near your, near the coffee shop you love, near your friends. You don't have to get any bridge club, which means we need more housing diversity. You have to have something nice to downsize into that is relatively close to your neighborhood, or you have to be able to downsize into something that is a lifestyle upgrade. But you know, the combination that we've seen of massive Exponential increases in property values with high interest rates means that when boomers are looking to downsize, they get a worse home for the same amount of money. And so the rational economic decision is to stay in a house that's too big for them, even if it doesn't fit their needs anymore. Because nobody's going to trade down a worse life just to free up some housing stock for everybody else. Right. So if we want empty nesters to actually move, we've got to legalize that kind of housing that they would want to move into that does improve their life as they start to be able to drive less, as they start to have different social needs.
- [10:51]
B
Yep. No, I couldn't agree more. I think it brings about some, some different conversations. Daniel, I was curious when, you know, when you think about the work that you and Chuck did together with escaping the housing trap and does, does an article or a framing like this, can it, even if we see some fundamental, maybe places where we don't agree, can it help advance the conversation that we, I think all three of us care about, Right? Like, if, if people start to see this as a trade off, you know, and as a, as a retirement crisis, not just this, you know, housing trap in a more generic sense, like, can that help advance the discussion, do you think?
- [11:40]
A
Yeah, I think it certainly can. And I think, I mean, this does, does a good job of getting at just some of the basic fundamentals of, like, how are people thinking about housing over the course of their life? How are they thinking about security in their life? And I, I think it's a relatable piece and a good conversation starter. I just kind of, you know, I find my restless mind wanting to go a little bit beyond it because I, and I think Ali hit the nail on the head. I think where I want to take the conversation, not necessarily our conversation here, but like the collective conversation about how is. Is a lot of this circular aspect of it where it's like, the reason you feel financially insecure, the reason you feel like your retirement is maybe not secure, how much of that is about the fact that you've been on this housing treadmill your whole life because housing is so expensive, and how much of it in retirement is because options that would be more appropriate for you at that stage in life don't exist. I mean, Ali's the source of one of my favorite housing factoids that I cite all the time about just the insane mismatch between the households that exist in this country and stock that exist in this country and what we're Building. And you can correct me on the numbers, but it was like roughly two thirds of households are like one or two people. And we're building mostly three and four bedroom houses. And it's like what, what? But. And there are a lot of reasons for that. And our book gets into a lot of them. But this whole notion that like the starter home or the reasonable kind of downsize into home that, you know, those ends of the, the housing options for those two ends of the lifespan, just like we're not creating them, they don't exist. And so a lot of the dysfunction is downstream of what we're building and what we're not building and why, and it's downstream of that scarcity.
- [13:31]
B
Right, right.
- [13:33]
C
And I think that's something that there's a, there's a new piece out that is called the Great Housing Reversal. That is an analysis of, of a couple of different good sets of economic data that is also really talking about how the boomer generation that currently own most of those homes, single family suburban homes on large lots, three to five bedrooms, the thing that we've really legalized everywhere, that most of those homes were built for them, right. The suburban homes that we were building in the 1950s for, you know, the boomers parents were the typical Levittown house, right. Was two, two bedrooms, 750 square feet. Suburban homes were dramatically smaller. They were more mixed use that we have this very specific generational pattern that we built the zoning systems, the transportation systems and the municipal systems around that form of housing because that's what they wanted. And so now they own the predominant number of those homes. We are still inheriting the system that is primarily legalizing those homes. That is not what we're seeing Gen Z, millennial, Gen X buyers, you know, preference when they are given a preference, all of kind of the, those other three younger generations that we're seeing are being housed where they can afford to be housed. Right. We've got a significantly lower generational wealth number in all of those generations. We've got a lower relative income relative to housing costs for all of, you know, all three of those groups than most of the boomers did when they bought those houses. And so we also, I think there's a, I do think the article has a missing nuance that this is a really specific generational housing, housing problem because they built a really novel form of housing for themselves and built all these other systems around it. And it is going to have, I think, a really mixed reception even when those houses start to sell right now. Values are very high because we built systems where nothing else could be built. I think as we start to see other things be legalized, we're going to see a wider set of housing types that are seen as, you know, as desirable, if not more desirable. And I think there's that, like, one paragraph in the piece that's tucked in there that's actually like the, you know, the most important part to me is that. And we've seen this in a couple of cities, but. Right. It's mentioned that Berkeley tripled its permitting and then watched its rents fall back to 2018 levels. Right. That's not, that's not a theoretical. If you build more, housing costs will lower. We're seeing that in major markets. Minneapolis, Austin. My market in northwest Arkansas is seeing some of the same thing. We see a price correction as soon as we start to see other things be available to the market. And so I think, you know, I would like to see that explored more is how do we shift from this system that was really built around one generation's preferences into a more diverse housing set in a way that recognizes that that generation did also put all of their eggs in that housing basket.
- [16:34]
B
Right. And I think that that is the. One of the takeaways, I think, for, for me with the article was understanding that it is this, as Daniel said, I think in the first thing he said was this larger question of, of security, you know, and I think that this article does a really good job of kind of sharing that sense of security that was maybe achieved through other ways. And, and now this is one of the, one of the lingering ways, I guess, that is, that is maybe being held onto even more tightly. But I think both of you are so skilled at helping, helping really tease out what are the issues at play here and that it isn't simply just the trap as we describe it. What was your, I guess, maybe big picture takeaway from this article, Daniel, like, as far as advancing the conversation that you've been so entwined in for the last few years, like, what do you, what do you think? What was the insight that you took away, aside from wanting to do the math a little bit more. Right. And challenge some of these assumptions, what is it in advance, as far as your thinking goes?
- [17:41]
A
I think talking about retirement in a very real way that connects to the truth of people's lives is an opening to having more productive conversations about how we can shift the system. And I mean, I think even looking at the work that the AARP has done on this issue, like, just in terms of messaging. And in terms of the political conversation, I mean, they've been huge allies of strong towns over the year. They've worked with the parking reform network where I am now. Like, they've been kind of great. And that doesn't mean that their average sort of member. The awareness is there. You know, there's not some secret teeming majority maybe of retired Americans right now who just want, you know, a little walkable townhouse in a, in a cute urban area. And they know that that's what they want. And I just wish the market were supplying this to like, I wish I had a backyard ADU that I could. I think, I don't think public awareness of sort of these alternative options is quite there if you're not in this bubble of people working on incremental development and working on re legalizing urban forms and housing options that used to exist in more abundance. But I think that it's a conversation you can have with people and it's often really eye opening. So like again, getting at, you know, meeting people where they are on the insecurity about how am I going to be able to live comfortably for the rest of my life and know that the rug isn't getting pulled from under me, you know, meeting people with they are on that, where they are on that, but then actually being able to say, hey, maybe there's a vision of what your, your life and your neighborhood and your home could be in retirement that you like a little bit better than what you see in front of you. And maybe we could talk about what that would look like and what kind of public policy would get us there. So I think there are some natural allies there. And maybe that's my frustration. It's not just trying to quibble over the math, but it's like I say, frustration a lot. I didn't overwhelmingly dislike this article, but I just feel like my initially my hackles got up at like, oh, this is this intractable problem because we want housing to be affordable, but it's also people's nest egg and they're going to cling to that and they're never going to let go of that. And actually I think there is a way that we can ease away from that. By, I mean, yeah, you look at the numbers out of Berkeley, you look at like, we can build and we can legalize options and they do emerge and it's, it's incremental and progress can be halting. And sometimes the policy victories, you know, initially seem a little bit fruitless because you haven't unlocked every deadbolt that you need to unlock to actually see a meaningful shift in what is getting built on the ground. Like, this is something where it's going to be a trickle until it's a flood. And we don't know necessarily what's going to open those floodgates, like, what's going to be the last. But I think that we're seeing real change. We're seeing reason for optimism. We're seeing policymakers have different conversations about the built environment. And I. And fundamentally, I think that there is a way to ease away from some of these issues. Like, the more intractable piece of the housing trap, as we articulated in the book, to me, is not the retirement issue. It's the way that the mortgage market is intertwined with the financial foundation of the whole economy.
- [20:51]
B
Right. Allie brought up the point, too. The way that the suburban development pattern has now. We have so much that is now built to a finished state with so many people that are dependent on that in one way or the other. And, you know, thinking about if you're. If you're moving an elderly family member somewhere, you know, it's. It's often very difficult to keep them in, as Ali said, in that same bridge club. Right. And so I think that looking at this as an integrated issue, which I think, Ally, you did such a great job of communicating, not just fixing the housing piece, but, you know, thinking about the transportation issues that have been created as well. Allie, any thoughts on. On that or Daniel's. Daniel's. I guess, takeaway from the article that you want to add?
- [21:45]
C
Yeah, I think a lot of my takeaways were, you know, I think there is some of the language that gets used kind of in these circles that is starting to trickle up. I think there's a lot of policies that are starting to kind of get a broader understanding. I think we've not yet. The thing that this article showed me is we've not yet done a good job of explaining how complicated and intertwined all of this is, because I think there's a lot of things that got brushed on that to me are like a whole other, you know, should have been a whole other article. Right. The 401k shift. Right. That the shift from pensions to 401k was called a historical accident. That wasn't an accident. That was a policy decision that offloaded risk from employers onto individual workers. And so calling it an accident kind of lets everybody off the hook, which is the same thing with housing. Right. We didn't stumble into this system where homes have to be retirement plans. We built this system on purpose after the war and we could build a different system on purpose. But we've got to think about it as a whole system because even as we take this a lens out, we have the same municipal fiscal fragility that. The article nails the household version of that problem. But then it misses the municipal version. Cities are running exactly the same scheme as the homeowners in the piece. They need property values to keep climbing just to service their infrastructure debt that they took on assuming growth would never stop. And so that retirement trap that the author is describing, the kitchen table, is also happening at City Hall. It is our growth Ponzi scheme. Right. It is just a different. On a different version of the balance sheet because it's a system. And so the same rules are happening at every level of complexity because that's the way the system works. And so we can't fix one little piece at a time. We have to think about the way the system is working and then replace it. Right. We can't downsize our way into a worse lifestyle. We've got to build a better system that is accomplishing all of these different things in terms of economic stability and economic mobility and a real way for people to, during their working years in some way be contributing meaningfully to a retirement plan that is going to be there when they retire. We've got to create that safety, but we've got to do it in a really comprehensive economic way because that's the system we're working against. Changing one piece won't fix it.
- [24:05]
B
So well said. I think that like all of us are constantly working towards, you know, increasing the understanding of the complexity around these issues that we care so much about. And I do, I would agree with your conclusion that like this, you know, what this brought forward for me was like, oh, there's so much more that doesn't get, that doesn't get uncovered as this, with this explanation, which I think is why I was gravitating towards like what can it do for us in terms of driving the conversation? Because it does. It is an opening that people care about, right? They care about it and it resonates with them. Daniel, I would love for you, as one of the co authors of the Housing Trap, to kind of have the last word on this article and maybe give some people some hope on what you see, the opportunities for us. There's a lot of momentum in the housing space and a housing bill just passed and you know, where's the reason for hope?
- [25:09]
A
The housing space really is the source of a whole lot of policy innovation right now compared to a lot of other aspects of public policymaking. And it's not always cohering into an understanding of the system as a system. But I think that, I mean, it's an exciting thing to work on because there are people talking about really changing things. We're seeing things change on the ground. You know, we're seeing it happen in ways that sort of defy the complete gridlock of the political system. In other areas, we're seeing bipartisan victories, non partisan victories. We're seeing, you know, North Carolina just eliminated all of its parking requirements except in a handful of coastal areas. They did it statewide. They did it by an overwhelming bipartisan vote and in a way that wasn't even like fixated on housing costs. It was, it was an environmental campaign. But it was like, here's an issue that, like, we can bring all these different coalition partners to the table and we can talk about an issue that the first time you raise it with a legislator, they're going to be like, what? Why parking lot? Why? But there's an openness. I think everybody senses that the system is broken. Very few people can articulate, you know, what is it about the system. Talking about Ali, you know, zoom not to that holistic the system. Very few people can articulate that. And most days I feel like I can't. And I wrote half a book about it. But people are very open to trying things. And it's an exciting area of policy because of that. And it's happening at the local level and at higher levels and with a lot of consensus that we need to shake some stuff up. So like, that's where my optimism comes from. And I think connecting people's basic sense of insecurity, like, I think that the overwhelming thing that people feel, you know, left, right, rural, urban, you go around the country, people feel precarity. They feel like, I don't feel like the future is gonna give me a good life that I want. And if you can meet people there, explaining some of this housing stuff is a way in which you can have a really interesting and really productive conversation with just about everyone. And like, maybe it won't fix the whole 401k pension, you know, some of these bigger forces, you know, and nobody's going to come in and script the solution to all that from the top down. But this is something people want to talk about and they want to change stuff. And like, that's, that's where I want to be working.
- [27:38]
B
That's awesome. That's a. That's a great last word. I think there's a. There's a phrase about, you know, things seeming impossible until they're done. Right. And I feel like we're in that moment with some of these housing. Housing policy changes that's really exciting to be a part of. So thanks to both of you for all your work. Well, now we're going to go to the down zone, and we're going to start with Ali. Ali, what is something that you have been reading, listening to, watching, experiencing that maybe isn't about what we've been talking about that you want to share with the group?
- [28:15]
C
I have been really reading and thinking about, you know, that. That midlife change that Arthur C. Brooks talks about as kind of the shift from fluid intelligence. Right. Where kind of we're inventive and we're making lots of things into crystallized intelligence. And that. That is like your later years of being able to, you know, fewer inventions and fewer patents and fewer new ideas come from people in that crystallized intelligence era, but that lots of the connections and teaching come from people in that. And that different careers have different times, that that happens. Like the half life of a career is what he's talking about. Right. So if you're a professional athlete, your fluid intelligence time has a really short half life. You're going to be retired by the time you're 40, probably, if you're a historian, that's the one that he references as being the longest. The half life is really long, and you're still doing some of your best work when you're 70. And so I've been thinking about that a lot because he doesn't specifically talk about designers, but really starting to position a lot of the work that we're seeing coming out of our field. And that lens has been interesting and thinking about it not as a downside, but thinking about that as he talks about it as two curves, right. That you have to kind of jump from one strength to the other strength. And I think that it's a really interesting way to think about. There's lots of people towards that maturity in our fields, generally. There's lots of crystallized intelligence. And then thinking about organizational structures and how we shift and how we both really maximize people during that fluid intelligence time and how we really shift as a field, people in their crystallized intelligence. I've been thinking about that a lot. I just finished that book. It was recommended to me, and it's been something that shifted the way I thought about professional life and about a lot of the professionals around me and how we could all be doing better to be maximizing what we're best at at the time of life and the phase of life that we're best at it.
- [30:18]
B
That is awesome. Thank you for sharing that. That makes me adding to my reading list for sure. That's great. That's great. Daniel, I'd love to hear what have you been reading? What have you been thinking about? What do you want to share with our, with our listeners?
- [30:32]
A
I have struggled to find time, you know, with young kids in the house for, for reading long form books. And that's something I hope to kind of move back into in my life. I have been following a bunch of really interesting kind of substack newsletters, things like that and they, they show up in my inbox and I can find 20 minutes more easily than I can sit down for two hours. One that I love. And so this isn't like a particular installment of it that I'm thinking of, but so Construction Physics is a newsletter by Brian Potter that does these incredible accessible deep dives into how things work related to technology, related to certain industries, how this is built or how that is built. And from a very holistic perspective, it's not necessarily just the mechanics of a technology. It could be something like how does an oil refinery work? Was a recent one. And it goes into sort of the whole process and some of the history of why there was one all about amplifiers and how amplifier technology has all these applications that like, I mean in my mind an amplifier is, is for music, right? Like actually like talking about the history of that innovation and then the different applications of it. So it's just like every time I open up one of these, I'm going to learn something I had no idea about. And it's going to be a little window into a whole world of something I had no idea about. But he always brings this really interesting lens about why does technological change unfold in the ways it does? And you know, why, why does productivity increase in this but not in that? And why does this cost what it does and why does the market for this look the way it does? So just like highly recommended.
- [32:22]
B
I will definitely have to check that out. That's awesome. That's great. Well, I think by the time this episode airs, I think I would be remiss to say, not talk about the fact that probably for the last month my free time has been watching the World cup, if we're, if we're being totally honest. So, you know, I too have not made time for reading like I like to, but it's for a different reason. I've been watching a whole lot of soccer and so I'm sure over the weekend hopefully we're going to have exciting game but really enjoyed. Oh, I am a soccer fan, I will admit, but I also just like seeing the, the cultures come together and, and this summer it was in, in the U.S. and that was really beautiful to see all, all of the different communities come together and experience, experience our culture and, and take a little bit and leave a little bit here. So hopefully we'll have, have some great soccer this weekend. And it's been a, it's been a, it's been a fun part of the summer, so it's been really nice.
- [33:23]
A
So now so, so here's the question where you know, I could give you the opportunity to have a take or a prediction for this weekend that is not going to eat.
- [33:30]
B
Oh my gosh.
- [33:31]
A
Because I know that this will go live after the. Right.
- [33:34]
B
Right.
- [33:35]
A
Or you can, you could.
- [33:36]
B
All I can say is that I think that it is a very, you know, if you're a soccer fan, you know that for a long time it's been a debate of if Messi is the is the greatest of all time. And I think that this tournament has been really fun to watch like someone at the peak of their talents and, and if you can just appreciate people at the peak of their talents regardless of the, of the size sport or the academia or, or whatever, this is certainly an opportunity to do that. So that's been one of my favorite parts. So no predictions though. So by the time folks listen, there will be an answer. All right. Well, Daniel, Ally, thank you so much for joining us. And that's all for this episode of Upzoned. Thank you all for listening. And on behalf of all of us at Strong Towns, take care of yourselves and your places.
- [34:24]
A
Let me show you what I'm about to do. I'm about to this episode was produced by Strong Towns, a non profit movement for building financially resilient communities. If what you heard today matters to you, deepen your connection by becoming a Strong towns member@strongtowns.org membership.