Mamdani Inflation

On the intergenerational crisis that dare not speak its name

Inflation week continues. The previous articles used inflation as a metaphorical device, but today we speak about its destructive, modern, economic iteration: the ballooning price of housing. It’s an issue - “affordability” - that made Mamdani New York mayor. It’s an issue - “cost of living” - that is driving Britons to vote extreme. Its pertinence couldn’t be more relevant. It’s leading to political instability, economic misery, reduced birth rates and (therefore) mass immigration to sustain the economy. It’s leading to intergenerational distrust. It’s destroying Western society and is an article not to be missed!

ARTICLE 1: Word Inflation (Daniel Clarke-Serret):

Word Inflation

ARTICLE 2: Moral Outrage Inflation (Nachum Kaplan):

Moral Outrage Inflation

---

---

“Mamdani Inflation” by Daniel Clarke-Serret

If we are to arrest the decline of liberal democracy, we must address the cause that dare not speak its name. For although racial, sexual and other inequalities are very real, they fall into insignificance next to the granddaddy of them all: Intergenerational inequality.

Until his recent death, my grandfather (1 engineer married to 1 shop assistant) rattled around in a large four-bedroom house in the suburbs of London replete with a stunning, Eden-esque garden long absent of the sound of screaming children.

Meanwhile my parents (1 engineer, 1 secretary) have lived for decades in a sizeable three bedroom house in the home counties replete with a very reasonably sized garden; this too is now absent of children playing in the sun.  

Meanwhile my daughter (of 2 postgraduate-educated professionals) grew up without a garden in a mould-infested, rather cramped two-bedroom flat in a location far-removed from their family.

The gradual decline in purchasing power is obvious to all by the blind. And one is forced to ask the following questions: Which age group really needs to live in a house with a garden? And which could make do in small apartment? And even if the amount of housing stock remained unchanged, is its distribution fair, just and conducive to social stability?

If you were to ask my parents - and my grandfather before them - to explain this clear disparity of lifestyle they would answer thus: “we worked hard”. Which of course is quite the implied insult; because, of course, I, and my generation, are bone lazy and have never worked an hour in our collective lives.   Trust me: they have made this absurb comment many times and what it confirms is that denial is a key part of human nature.

My parents are wrong. My grandfather was wrong. And they are wrong in an entirely self-interested way. They know as well as I that there is no difference between their commitment to work and that of my own generation. They know as well as I that whilst it would be nice for everyone to live in a large house with a large garden, the priority is for young families who need the space - including outside space - to bring up multiple children in a comfortable way. But they want hoard the luxury that they feel is owed to them.

They speak of the financial struggles that they endured as young adults and I get that. Everyone suffers in life. But when we speak of governmental policy and the public good, we need to consider what would constitute a just society. And what a just society isn’t is young family after young family having to endure a life of relative squalor in a 1-2 bed flat unfit for human habitation; especially when their parents and grandparents are living like kings in a more expensive part of the country.   

This pattern - repeated nationwide and throughout much of the Western World - is alienating the younger half of the population from their respective countries. It is leading them to question what democracy and liberalism is doing for them. It is causing them to have less and less children. And it is provoking an unmistakable rage that is shaking the foundations of the land. 

We live in the age of Mamdani inflation, where the increasing price of housing, in London, New York and throughout the West, is leading young people into the hands of radical socialists, the far-right and other tried and failed options.

Although Mamdani’s anti-Zionist rhetoric may whip up his base and mass immigration may anger the Reform UK faithful, it is housing - its ridiculous cost and its absurd distribution - that is leading to end of centrist, Western government.

Affordability, “Cost of Living”, call it what you will: the failure to address this issue is leading us headlong towards disaster. So, it is in this light, that the answers furnished by our leaders are shocking, but not surprising. Indeed no matter the unexpected crisis, the response of Western governments is always to transfer more money to the older generations.

Tax revenues getting short! Let’s prioritise the “pensions triple lock”.

People are living longer! Let’s splash out on welfare.

Economic crisis! Let’s ensure that those house prices keep rising.

Covid! Let’s spend more money on healthcare. Let’s confine the non-vulnerable young to home. Let’s destroy the economy and send the debt bill to the next generation.

I don’t blame our governing masters. After all, it’s the older people that vote. It’s the older people who have a reason to vote.  And how they are rewarded for doing so. 

The problem with this most obvious and unjust of inequalities is that there isn’t an obvious consequence for the older generations to worry about. Are children going to rise up against their parents? Are grandchildren going to declare revolution on the elderly? No. Of course not. And thus this issue will continue to perpetuate itself, causing increasing anger among the young in the process.  And by young I don’t mean wee nippers. I mean the under 45s.

The government is in an electoral trap. With every election, there is less and less reason to appeal to the young; and the young have less and less outlets to vent their anger. When students protest against their own Western nations; or raise the flag of Palestine; or call for the status quo to be overthrown; the true underlying reason is clear: Give us a reason to believe in our country. Or we’ll tear the whole bloody edifice down.

But to be clear: they want to believe. I want to believe. Though they may scream ignorantly about foreign policy, their real needs are far more simple. And reasonable. Make higher education accessible. Give us a home. Reward us fairly. Allow us the opportunity to live like our parents. And give us the opportunity to live with dignity. Otherwise we’ll vote for Mamdani, his economic illiteracy be damned.

With our governments powerless, the responsibility lies with you. The parents whose kids have left home. The grandparents for whom parenthood is but a distant memory. You cannot hide yourselves away in palaces, like a King Louis in denial, while your progeny live in a hopeless abyss.

I bluntly asked my grandfather: why can’t my small family live in your large house? Why can’t we bring up our daughter here? “Don’t worry”, I said, “It will still be your property. We are talking about living, not owning. And the bonus is that we can look after you in your old age and give you company.”

Anyway it didn’t happen. He sold the house. He moved into an overpriced retirement flat. He died shortly afterwards. Now the beneficiaries are struggling to sell his newly-moved into property. 

A stupid decision was made and a decision which was poor for all concerned. For a child who was forced to grow up in a small flat. For the unborn child that could have born if it had been more economically viable. And for the elderly person who could have lived out his days in company and in the loving presence of his great-grandchild. Now to be clear our grandfather was very generous with his money towards us. But it wasn’t cash we wanted. It was a home fit for a young child.

I make a simple proposition, a move - that if followed widely- could change our political landscape, reinforce State stability, improve intergenerational understanding and tempt young voters away from the radical extremes. Let’s call it an antidote to Mamdani-ism.

With their stagnating salaries, younger people should buy an appartment for their older family members to live in. The older family members should then let their descendants live in their large outdoor space-adorned properties. Ownership will not be affected, but living arrangements will. The correct people will then be living in the correct properties.

Even better: how about multi-generational living? No older person alone in their final years. Either way, this is not something that the government can do for us, either politically or morally. The government cannot steal. But the older generation must voluntarily fulfill their responsibility to ensure that their offspring live dignified lives in appropriate housing units. It is their duty. And they are shirking it.

 The complaint that insufficient houses are being built may have some validity. The criticism that housing is a speculative good, encouraging hyperactive investment and economic bubbles, is a factor that cannot be ignored. And nimbyism is an ever-present reality. Yet, when all is said and done, it is not the amount of housing that is the problem, but how it is distributed among the population. Retired people do not need large houses. Young families do. 

And I know they worked for it. We all work. And hard. But the young are working for no reward whatsoever. And that is an injustice which is gnawing away at the foundations of our democratic contract. It is an insult to the under 45s, carrying the implication that we are lazy and feckless. And our economic situation is such that the birth rate is falling and immigration is rising quickly to compensate (causing further issues beyond the scope of this article).

Although all of us in property-owning families may be lucky enough to inherit wealth when we ourselves are retired, that is hardly a consolation: for by that time our children will have grown up and we too will have no need for cavernous accommodation.

We live in strange times; an epoque of a thunderous obsession: the crusade for equality. Racial. Sexual. Transsexual. A shrinking number even remain interested in the economic disparities between the rich and poor. Yet we completely ignore intergenerational equality and then wonder why half the population - including my 40-something compatriots - are disenchanted with what democracy has to offer.

Not long ago, we saw an incomprehensible emphasis on the fact that the handsomely paid BBC China editor was underpaid compared with her astronomically and more generously compensated male co-workers; which despite its unacceptability was of precisely no interest to chronically underpaid masses. Poor Carrie Gracie: she only earned 135,000 pounds per year! If only the wolves of the media cared so much about the young.   

Two stories to conclude. Two stories which show the depth of the issue. Back in Spain, I often went out for a drink with the parents at my daughter’s school. Now I was hardly a youngster at 42; my daughter born when I was a respectably average 33. Yet I felt like I’d just arrived out of nappies when sat next to the geriatric parents to my right and left. He was 54. She was 52. He was 50. She was 53. And they only had 1 kid just like us.

Moreover, they were the lucky ones. Childless women in Spain are as common as the cholesterol-covered offerings at your average tapas bar. The birth rate among Spaniards is appallingly low; and it isn’t because they don’t want kids. Quite the opposite. The economics just make this most human of activities an aspirational dream.

Meanwhile here in the UK, I have a very dear friend. We chat regularly. We are tennis buddies. We were always in each other’s company back in our Tunbridge Wells days. He comes from high breeding indeed: His family own a huge country manor in the English countryside. His father went to Eton College. And his grandfather was a well known British politician in the Thatcher era.

So where did we meet? In the local State child care centre dropping off our daughters one rainy morning.

Where does he live? In a 2 bedroom flat just like us.

And if that isn’t an example of generational inequality I don’t know what is. Top of the pile to regular gent (with a healthy inheritance!) in 1 generation. This gaping problem is chronic; and all roads of modern grievance lead to its door. So what are we going to do?

What are you going to do?

This one was probably in your Spam. It was in mine!