Presumably by subsidizing the housing. Housing is interesting, because what really affects the market is housing stock, not housing investment. But of course housing investment over time builds housing stock.

edit: This wikipedia article proved interesting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_estate_economics

...by dramatically increasing supply?

...which would decrease demand (ceteris paribus) :-) I think the question was academic, not practical.

Supply and demand can both increase. It's the difference that matters.

I wrote "ceteris paribus". Please actually read comments before downvoting. My comment still stands. If, everything else remaining equal, supply "dramatically increases" than demand will fall.

While I didn't downvote your comment, using Latin on an English speaking site isn't an effective means of expressing ideas.

I have to agree that to assume everyone would understand some Latin phrase is, well.. presumptuous.

That is a common phrase in ergonomics. I myself don't speak any Latin apart from a handful of phrases, like et al, et ceterea, pecunia non olet... - the usual stuff that I think most people have been exposed to. And "ceteris paribus" is THE phrase in economics. It of course applies to all models, but in that field it's actually being used in everyday speech, and always and immediately (when starting to study anything "economics"). I'm not even an economics person, only learned a little bit of it on the side (didn't find it interesting enough).

So it is NOT a stretch at all to assume that someone who wants to debunk a statement made on the basis of the boring standard subject of economics, the supply and demand relationship, has heard about it! If not, it would be even worse for his statement.