Remember, in last year’s presidential campaign, the word we kept hearing was “Weird.” Part of the Democrats’ campaign strategy against the Republican ticket, the term gained such wide traction that it was later named one of Merriam-Webster’s words of the year for 2024. Now they’re back again with a new word. “Affordability.” Republicans have even joined in its use.

Zohran Mamdani won the New York City mayoralty race, decrying the absence of “affordability.” Donald Trump now claims he’s close to bagging the elusive “Affordability.” Both major parties now plan their 2026 election strategies on convincing the nation they’re the ones to deliver “affordability.”

The remedies offered by both sides sound more like comedy routines than solutions, but the laugh is on us. You don’t have to have a PHD. in economics to realize some simple facts. If prices remain high and continue to rise, it indicates an excessive demand chasing a limited supply. We quaintly call this the “Law of supply and demand.” The high price of anything is a signal to the market to produce more.

The Federal Reserve can reduce the supply of dollars, or the government can raise taxes to a point where there is less money available for spending, and the likely resulting slower business conditions lead to reduced demand. That path is painful for voters, so neither party advocates those policies.  

That leaves increasing supply. The Trump administration aims to return to the reduced regulation and favorable business tax policies that were effective during the first term of the Trump presidency. These policies are classic supply-side economics. Don’t get in the way of the market. High prices, if left uninterfered with, will attract capital and innovation, filling the gap.

Reducing regulations and making taxes more business-friendly proved effective in Trump’s first term. Similar actions allowed Reagan to tame the “Great Inflation” of the 1970s and restore growth and prosperity. Trump had analogous results.

However, this time around, Trump is determined to offset these solid policies with a trip down the mercantilist lane. That economic system encouraged domestic production over free trade.

High tariffs protect the less efficient domestic production from competition. Unfortunately, ‘less efficient’ is just another way of saying ‘higher priced’. High tariffs inevitably entail the government picking winners and losers, a task best left to the market.

How does this affect people? Throughout my lifetime of giving financial advice, I can offer you a simple gauge of what makes people happier financially and what turns them sour. At the end of the month, do I have disposable income to pursue what makes me happy, or am I just covering the basics?.

If you can cover your basics, housing, utilities, insurance, basic food, transportation, and clothing, and still have money for stuff you dream about, a great trip, gourmet meals, entertainment, whatever makes life enjoyable, rather than just existing, you’re bound to be happier.

It used to be that housing, generally your most significant expense, took up about a quarter of your income. Now, for many, it’s more than double that amount. Then you add rising utilities and insurance. This situation results in little to no disposable income. We know where the fun in life went.

While less red tape could lower the cost of housing, higher material and labor expenses will likely more than offset the reduction. Components like lumber and copper are integral to any home. We import 45-50% of the former, and 30% of the latter. Tariffs will only raise their price.

Migrants make up about 30% of our construction force. Trump’s deportation and restrictive immigration policies can only mean fewer workers when we need more: the result is higher construction costs. What do you want to bet that the big numbers Trump claimed to have caused to leave the country were concentrated in the construction industry?

This one step forward, two steps back, permeates the Trump administration’s approach to price levels. Adding to these hurdles, Trump uses executive orders for tariffs and other aspects of his economic policy, and he frequently revises them. How can a business plan its capital investments if the terms change on a Presidential whim, whether it’s the present one or the next?

While Trump buries his positive supply-side actions under an avalanche of offsetting bad policies, the Democrats, led by their socialist wing, show no awareness of the law of supply and demand at all. New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani thinks capping rents will solve the city’s housing crisis. New Jersey Governor-Elect Mikie Sherrill thinks capping utility bills solves her state’s problem of rapidly rising energy costs. Experience says the opposite.

Joining the parade, the Los Angeles City Council has just lowered its rent cap. Mamdani aims to increase demand for New York City’s hard-pressed transportation services by offering free bus rides, while subsidizing childcare.

Price controls discourage supply expansion. They may provide some momentary relief to a few, but they can only exacerbate the problem. Rent controls helped create the problem in the first place. Subsidies increase demand.

What both parties have in common is a lack of real, nuts-and-bolts solutions to the supply imbalances. What are their policies to rein in areas of rapid price rises, such as medical, education, and housing? Rather than relying on simple buzzwords and phrases like “affordability,” real solutions involve bringing disparate elements together in workable plans that deliver tangible benefits.

I dedicated this blog to policies that deliver results. “Dave’s Plan” for universal healthcare shares similarities with other successful programs, such as Singapore’s more affordable system. Project managers for larger endeavors apply responsibility—preapprovals of development speed up the process without ignoring concerns.

Government standards for modular construction could revolutionize the construction industry, providing nearly endless choice. What all these ideas have in common is the ability to get things done quickly, efficiently, and affordably..

You might not like my ideas, but at least they’re honest attempts at real solutions. The two parties offer nothing but fixes that experience shows only raise, not lower, prices. Serious individuals are offering innovative ideas that have real promise to bring down prices. The question is, are leaders on both sides listening?

Suppose we continue at today’s 3% inflation rate until the end of Trump’s second term. In that case, the median American household will have to earn an additional $10,500 to stay even (3% compounded over four years). Unless you earn more than that, you won’t close the gap between you and the good stuff in life.

Until we take our problems seriously, “Affordability” will be like “Weird.”