OMG I just had a thought. (I know, occasionally it still happens).

In Japan, workers get seniority-based raises. In America they often don't.

So HOUSE PRICE APPRECIATION became the vehicle by which Americans turned age into dignity.

People want to feel that they accomplish something as they age.

Seeing young people richer than you is grating for many (most?) people.

If salaries don't advance as you get older, how can the dignity of age be preserved?

America's answer: Housing prices.

In Japan, houses DEPRECIATE over time, like a car. https://www.nri.com/global/opinion/papers/2008/pdf/np2008137.pdf

Why do people tolerate this? Because at the same time, they or their spouses are getting seniority-based raises.

YIMBYs want to make RENT cheaper for the poor and working class.

NIMBYs want to ensure house price appreciation so that today's middle-class can have a smooth glide path to wealth (and dignity) in their old age.

Housing is one area where the interests of the middle class - and especially the middle-aged middle class - conflict directly with the interests of the poor and working class.

Of course, we don't want to think this - we want to think the rich are running away with all the money. That's why NIMBYs paint housing supply as a scheme for developer profits, rather than an upper-middle-class savings vehicle.

But there's no getting around it: Stocks belong to the rich, houses belong to the middle- and upper-middle class. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-28/how-the-top-1-keeps-getting-richer

Of course, there's a lot more than this going on - NIMBYs also worry about neighborhood "quality", though they try not to be too vocal about this.

But the central problem is this: If America turns housing from a savings vehicle into an affordable resource, we need to figure out some OTHER way of preventing aging from being a long inexorable slide into penury.

And since seniority-based raises are highly inefficient, that means we need some other way for people to passively build wealth as they age.

This is where @MattBruenig's Social Wealth Fund comes in. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/opinion/inequality-social-wealth-fund.html

A social wealth fund's payouts could be scaled based on age, so people naturally feel themselves to be getting wealthier over time - without the need for exclusionary housing policies. (end)