While I’m on this, I’ll give just one example.

When Mayor Pete took office in South Bend, he inherited a local community with a large disparity of wealth.

In some parts of town, homes had fallen into disrepair and blight.

1/ https://twitter.com/hoarsewisperer/status/1198959617876865028
Mayor Pete’s initial solution was to focus on aggressively targeting the owners of abandoned, disrepaired and eyesore properties.

He called it his “1,000 Houses in 1,000 Days” plan.

Under it, South Bend forced the sale or demolition of 1,000 properties.

2/
On paper, blighted properties *are* the problem. They invite crime, reduce property values, and reduce investment by outside businesses. They hold a community back.

In reality, they are less THE problem than a symptom. And when you treat a symptom, you cure only the symptom.
Tearing down blighted and poorly maintained properties does indeed lift property values. It does increase a community’s “investability” among outside businesses.

However, it also raises cost of living in those now more expensive and, often, gentrified neighborhoods.

4/
Tear-downs do almost nothing to alleviate the underlying poverty.

Instead, they seize assets from vulnerable homeowners and lead to the displacement of many of their neighbors who can no longer afford to live there.

5/
On paper, the facile metrics of property values and average household income tick up.

In reality, a town just pushed out some of its poorest people to make room for less poor people.

6/
A President of the United States cannot improve poverty by displacing the poor from one small place in America to other small places in America.

Solutions that torpedo some boats while giving the appearance of lifting all boats aren’t really solutions.

7/
They aren’t even solutions in places like South Bend.

To his credit, Mayor Pete appears to have learned that quickly and made a substantial shift toward solving the larger actual problem: financial hardship among homeowners without the means to maintain their homes.

8/
Mayor Pete then put more focus on working with the communities and homeowners he had initially targeted for a bulldozing spree.

But not before tearing down a whole lot of houses and displacing a whole lot of already disadvantaged people.

9/
You can look at that from one of two perspectives:

- Mayor Pete entered with a naive perspective based on detached analyses and wasn’t wise enough to foresee very foreseeable harm

- Mayor Pete learned quickly and adapted

10/
Personally, I believe both are true but the former is more concerning than the latter is comforting.

The outage in Mayor Pete’s original thinking was a byproduct of a mindset common among many consultants: thinking being smart is the same as being wise.

11/
Mayor Pete can get to wise.

Right now, he’s mostly just smart though.

I think he’d make a serviceable President in the near-term.

I think he is some more bake time away from being a particularly good one though.

12/12
You can follow @TheRealHoarse.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: