In my professional writing, I try assiduously to keep my personal political preferences to the side. My opinions in that realm are not what readers looking for real estate economic expertise are seeking. Rather (or at least so I believe) readers want well-supported independent judgments based upon an analysis of verifiable facts. And that’s what I try to provide, even as I realize that a regurgitation of mere facts is not enough to either keep the interest of any informed reader or to provoke (stimulate) fresh thinking.
Nevertheless, even casual readers will surely detect a consistent perspective in my commentaries over time. That’s inevitable, since my economic philosophy is grounded in principles that may evolve over time but which have a core set of values as their touchstone.
The four columns I am posting today in “Industry Publications/Commercial Property Executive” rest on the foundation of that core values set.
“People, Get Ready For Extended Slowdown in CRE Demand” (March 2019)
“Get Ready for CRE’s New Normal” (December 2019)
“Investment Is About Expected Returns” (March 2020)
“The COVID-19 Economy: Beyond the Tipping Point” (June 2020)
In those columns, as in other of my writing, you will note a real skepticism about the cheerleading of the Trump Administration about the alleged “best economy in history” prior to the pandemic’s arrival and then the downplaying of the COVID threat from early 2020 even until very late in the year. My skepticism was, in all candor, reinforced by the notion floated about “alternative facts” as early as January 2017 by spokespeople for the President. Those of us dealing in facts - especially numerically verifiable facts - take great offense when empirical evidence is dismissed or disparaged. And that has been a regrettable pattern in both the assertions of the now-outgoing Administration and in its behaviors.
Such a pattern, sadly, found what is (I hope) its culminating expression in the assault on the US Capitol yesterday by those summoned by Mr. Trump to Washington, with the invitation “come to DC on January 6th: it will be wild”. And, true to form, it was wild in the sense of being unreasoning and feral. The damage done to our public discourse was far greater than that inflicted on our public property. And the damage to America’s international reputation adds to my dismay, since that reputation has been built for generations on values I hold particularly dear.
This week and next I will be spending time at the annual Eastern Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association. This is a gift to myself I’ve been enjoying since 2005, an opportunity to engage with smart people outside my usual circle of economic and real estate colleagues. I’ve found that getting beyond the “silo” of my day job(s) has been a very healthy practice in keeping tabs on my assumptions.
Back in 2016 I started keeping a file “Thinking in the Time of Trump.” One of the consistent strains of contributions to that file has been what philosophers call Epistemology, a fancy word for the study of knowledge itself - its sources, scope, and validity. In plain English, this is an attempt to consider how we know what is true and what is not true. The blurring of “truth” has been an increasing problem in our public life - and therefore in our social and working lives - in an era where the Washington Post’s tally of the President’s false or misleading statements now exceeds 25,000. Today’s New York Times Op-Ed page has a column headed, “America Is in a Reality Crisis.” Needless to say, such an environment makes the already difficult job of making sound real estate and economic judgments, much less forecasts, an even trickier assignment.
When a group of us were developing Fordham’s curriculum for a real estate masters degree, I insisted that an Ethics course be required for all our MSRE students. Here is another place where serious philosophical understanding can and should intersect with business practice. What are our responsibilities - beyond the minimum requirements of legal compliance - to clients, to our colleagues or employees, and to others touched by our real estate decision-making? And, let’s be honest, what does the President’s background as a real estate figure do to set public expectations about the integrity of those of us whose careers are identified with this field?
In the 1970s I was privileged to have the noted political philosopher Hannah Arendt as a teacher at The New School for Social Research. One of Arendt’s many books is “Men in Dark Times.” At one point in that text, she notes that for the philosopher Rousseau, “the human nature common to all men was manifested not in reason alone, but in compassion, an innate repugnance to seeing a fellow human being suffering.” For an economist, this is a great reminder that a key difference between pure math and economics is that in math a number is just a number, an abstract concept. But in the economic realm each number must stand for something in the world, and most often that “something” is a human being.
For those who think that economics needs to be abstracted from considerations such as compassion if it is to be “objective,” it is useful to recall that before he wrote “The Wealth of Nations” Adam Smith put together “The Theory of Moral Sentiments.” Smith’s view of “economics” (which was still called political philosophy in his day) incorporated an understanding of prudence, justice, and beneficence. Though we are self-interested, we are not - as persons - isolated economic agents, but live alongside others. That’s integral to real estate activity, most certainly. And so our real estate judgments and behaviors cannot be mere objects of calculation but should be informed and guided by our society’s need to survive and flourish. Today, we call that widening our perspective to consider the web of stakeholders affected by our activities.
This blog-post can be categorized as a form of “apologia.” This Greek term doesn’t mean “apology” or an expression of regret. An Apologia is an attempt to make clear the grounds for some course, belief, or position. So if I’m generally careful to avoid overtly political comments, I feel that today is a good moment to explain why my real estate economics cannot be entirely divorced from my philosophical values.