If AI Can Solve Housing, Why Are Humans Still in the Way?

 

We may be living in the only time in history when we believe we can solve almost any problem on the planet. 

Artificial intelligence is now capable of analyzing millions of data points, predicting trends, modeling scenarios, and offering solutions faster than a room full of experts who haven’t had their second cup of coffee yet. Housing affordability, labor shortages, zoning gridlock, supply chain disruptions—none of these are mysteries anymore. AI could probably give us ten workable strategies before your breakfast toast pops up.

So the obvious question becomes: if we have the tools, why aren’t we fixing the problems?

Here’s the uncomfortable answer. The real obstacle isn’t technology. It’s us.

The moment AI produces a thoughtful, well-researched, data-driven solution to affordable housing, human beings will immediately begin picking it apart. Within minutes. Not hours. Not days. Minutes. Someone will say it’s unrealistic. Someone else will say it’s too aggressive. Another will say it doesn’t consider local character. A fourth will say it’s politically impossible. By lunchtime, we’ll have formed three committees, two task forces, and a subcommittee to determine whether the first committee should continue meeting.

And none of that will be AI’s fault.

Let’s be honest. This isn’t new. We’ve been here before—long before anyone ever heard the term artificial intelligence. Back in the 1960s, there were bold, ambitious housing programs. Many had strong backing, serious funding, and clear urgency.

Yet in most cases, they stalled. Not because the ideas were bad. Not because the need disappeared. But because human beings stepped in and made the process complicated, political, and, eventually, unworkable.

The root of the problem is something we rarely talk about. It’s our deep, unshakable need to inject our personal opinions into everything.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Opinions are not evil. In fact, many of them protect us. Zoning laws, safety codes, financing standards, environmental reviews, and logistics planning all exist for good reasons. They prevent disasters, protect homeowners, and maintain community standards. But when every individual opinion becomes a veto, progress slows to a crawl. Add in one passionate neighbor with a well-printed protest sign, and suddenly a good project turns into a decade-long debate.

We’ve all seen it happen. One person stands up and says, “This doesn’t fit our neighborhood.” Another says, “What about traffic?” A third asks, “Who will live there?” And just like that, a workable plan becomes a steaming pile of paper studies, public hearings, and canceled contracts.

The irony, of course, is that I’m expressing an opinion right now. I’m blaming people for the housing crisis. Which, if we’re being honest, is also just my opinion. Somewhere out there is another writer saying the opposite. And they are equally convinced they are right.

So what can we do?

Over the years, I’ve joked—only half joking—that the solution is simple. Gather the smartest people in housing. Lock them in a room. Give them paper and pencils. Tell them they have eight hours to solve one specific problem. No phones. No committees. No press releases. No PowerPoint slides. And they don’t get to leave until they agree on something practical. Hang a big NIKE poster on the wall that says, “Just do it.”

Of course, that will never happen.

Because the moment someone suggests locking the experts in a room, another group will demand to know who selected the experts. A third group will say the room isn’t inclusive enough. A fourth will ask whether the pencils were sustainably sourced. And someone in the back will start a protest because they prefer pens.

That’s the real challenge. Not AI. Not technology. Not even money. It’s the messy, complicated, emotional, opinion-filled nature of being human.

And here’s the part nobody wants to admit. The same human qualities that slow progress are also the ones that make communities worth building in the first place. We care. We argue. We worry. We want things to be right.

So yes, AI will help. It will give us better answers, faster models, and clearer paths forward. But until we learn how to move from opinion to action, those answers will remain on screens, in reports, and in presentations at conferences where we all nod our heads and agree something should be done.

And then go back to doing exactly what we’ve always done.

But that’s just my opinion.

Gary Fleisher—known throughout the industry as The Modcoach—has been immersed in offsite and modular construction for over three decades. Beyond writing, he advises companies across the offsite ecosystem, offering practical marketing insight and strategic guidance grounded in real-world factory, builder, and market experience.